[2007] EWCA Crim 219

A judge had wrongly prevented himself from exercising the judgement required in deciding whether hearsay evidence was admissible in the interests of justice under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.114(1)(d) by incorrectly concluding that the conventional jury direction, that out of court statements made by one defendant in the absence of his co-defendant was evidence in his case alone, had not been abrogated and remained in force even when such evidence was admissible.

CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ, Rafferty J, Mackay J)

30/01/2007