Lecture 1 – Intro to Law of Evidence
Meaning and Types of Evidence
●Purpose and Function of the Law of Evidence
●Importance of relevance, admissibility and judicial discretion
●Functions of the Judge
●Functions of the Jury
●An introduction to judicial directions/warnings
Judicial Discretion - when referring to Judge’s freedom to decide on admissibility
‘Wednesbury Unreasonable’- no other judge could have reached the same conclusion.
R v O’Leary states that the judge’s decision was so perverse, that no other judge could reach
the same conclusion.
Inadmissible’ – when referring to exclusionary rules or rules of law.
‘Excluded’ – when referring to the use of judicial discretion
Stay of Proceedings’ – when referring to the halting of proceedings altogether due to abuse
of process- A “stay of proceedings” means the court stops the case from continuing.
When it happens because of abuse of process, it means the court believes something has
gone so wrong or unfair in the legal process that it would be unjust to continue the trial.
●‘Tribunal of Law' – Judge
●‘Tribunal of Fact’ - Jury
What is The Law of Evidence?
Evidence is the information with which the matters requiring proof in a trial are proved (or
disproved). E.g - A CCTV video showing Erff at the scene is evidence.
The law of evidence is the system of rules and judicial discretionary practice which regulates
how such material may be presented at trial.
, Types of Evidence (and there other types other than these 4)
Real Evidence’ –evidence in physical form e.g. murder weapon, fingerprints etc.
•‘Documentary Evidence’ – evidence in written form e.g. witness statements, receipts etc.
•‘Testimonial/Oral Evidence’ – live evidence given by a witness.
•‘Circumstantial Evidence’ – evidence from which facts may be inferred e.g. accused’s
motive, modus operandi etc. See R v George (Barry) [2007] EWCA Crim 2722- R v George
(circumstantial evidence) [2007] → principle: circumstantial evidence can be inferred – by
e.g the accused motives, modus operandi etc
In R v George (circumstantial evidence) [2007] Murder of Jill Dando, Barry George was
convicted of murdering TV presenter Jill Dando after police found pictures of her in his flat
and gunshot residue on his coat. There was no direct evidence linking him to the murder, but
the circumstantial evidence led to his conviction. His conviction was later quashed because
the evidence was unreliable, resulting in a miscarriage of justice.
What Is The Law of Evidence All About?
•As we have seen evidence can take the form of e.g. documents, oral, real or circumstantial.
•The law of evidence is concerned with relevance and admissibility and weight
•To be admissible evidence must be relevant – see DPP v Kilbourne [1973] AC 729-
Lord Simon of Glaisdale in DPP v Kilbourne –
RELEVANCE- DPP v Kilbourne - the legal principle- Evidence is relevant if it is logically
probative or disprobative of some matter which requires proof.
•Relevant evidence is admissible regardless of how it was obtained – see R v Leatham (1861)
8 Cox CC 498, Kuruma v R [1955] AC 197, R v Sang [1979] UKHL 3
* R v Kuruma – During British colonial rule in Kenya, police illegally searched the defendant
without a warrant and found ammunition. The court held that the key issue was whether
the evidence was relevant, not whether it was obtained illegally, so the evidence was
admissible.
* R v Leatham – A confession was obtained improperly, leading police to discover a letter
that became important evidence. The case established the principle that if evidence is
relevant, it is generally admissible even if obtained illegally.
•Relevance also exists alongside the concept of reliability – relevant evidence must also be
reliable – judicial discretion is used to exclude unreliable evidence
The Importance of Admissibility
Meaning and Types of Evidence
●Purpose and Function of the Law of Evidence
●Importance of relevance, admissibility and judicial discretion
●Functions of the Judge
●Functions of the Jury
●An introduction to judicial directions/warnings
Judicial Discretion - when referring to Judge’s freedom to decide on admissibility
‘Wednesbury Unreasonable’- no other judge could have reached the same conclusion.
R v O’Leary states that the judge’s decision was so perverse, that no other judge could reach
the same conclusion.
Inadmissible’ – when referring to exclusionary rules or rules of law.
‘Excluded’ – when referring to the use of judicial discretion
Stay of Proceedings’ – when referring to the halting of proceedings altogether due to abuse
of process- A “stay of proceedings” means the court stops the case from continuing.
When it happens because of abuse of process, it means the court believes something has
gone so wrong or unfair in the legal process that it would be unjust to continue the trial.
●‘Tribunal of Law' – Judge
●‘Tribunal of Fact’ - Jury
What is The Law of Evidence?
Evidence is the information with which the matters requiring proof in a trial are proved (or
disproved). E.g - A CCTV video showing Erff at the scene is evidence.
The law of evidence is the system of rules and judicial discretionary practice which regulates
how such material may be presented at trial.
, Types of Evidence (and there other types other than these 4)
Real Evidence’ –evidence in physical form e.g. murder weapon, fingerprints etc.
•‘Documentary Evidence’ – evidence in written form e.g. witness statements, receipts etc.
•‘Testimonial/Oral Evidence’ – live evidence given by a witness.
•‘Circumstantial Evidence’ – evidence from which facts may be inferred e.g. accused’s
motive, modus operandi etc. See R v George (Barry) [2007] EWCA Crim 2722- R v George
(circumstantial evidence) [2007] → principle: circumstantial evidence can be inferred – by
e.g the accused motives, modus operandi etc
In R v George (circumstantial evidence) [2007] Murder of Jill Dando, Barry George was
convicted of murdering TV presenter Jill Dando after police found pictures of her in his flat
and gunshot residue on his coat. There was no direct evidence linking him to the murder, but
the circumstantial evidence led to his conviction. His conviction was later quashed because
the evidence was unreliable, resulting in a miscarriage of justice.
What Is The Law of Evidence All About?
•As we have seen evidence can take the form of e.g. documents, oral, real or circumstantial.
•The law of evidence is concerned with relevance and admissibility and weight
•To be admissible evidence must be relevant – see DPP v Kilbourne [1973] AC 729-
Lord Simon of Glaisdale in DPP v Kilbourne –
RELEVANCE- DPP v Kilbourne - the legal principle- Evidence is relevant if it is logically
probative or disprobative of some matter which requires proof.
•Relevant evidence is admissible regardless of how it was obtained – see R v Leatham (1861)
8 Cox CC 498, Kuruma v R [1955] AC 197, R v Sang [1979] UKHL 3
* R v Kuruma – During British colonial rule in Kenya, police illegally searched the defendant
without a warrant and found ammunition. The court held that the key issue was whether
the evidence was relevant, not whether it was obtained illegally, so the evidence was
admissible.
* R v Leatham – A confession was obtained improperly, leading police to discover a letter
that became important evidence. The case established the principle that if evidence is
relevant, it is generally admissible even if obtained illegally.
•Relevance also exists alongside the concept of reliability – relevant evidence must also be
reliable – judicial discretion is used to exclude unreliable evidence
The Importance of Admissibility
