R v Christopher Friel
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Justice Gross |
| Judgment Date | 11 December 2012 |
| Neutral Citation | [2012] EWCA Crim 2871 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Docket Number | No: 2011/5892/C1 |
| Date | 11 December 2012 |
To continue reading
Request your trial
8 cases
-
R v Shelton Harvey, Emmanuel Laurencin, Yasemin Tutar and Levi Defreitas
...if it is the prosecution that wishes to put in the hearsay evidence and if it is the defence, they too must undertake proper checks. 52 In R v Friel [2012] EWCA Crim 2871, Gross LJ observed: 29. It is plain to us, therefore, that hearsay of any description is not to be nodded through or add......
-
The State v Nathaniel Augustine, otherwise called Kevin Dass
...24 (2000) 60 WIR 390, 402 25 R v Riat [2012] EWCA Crim 1509, [2013] 1 Cr. App. R. 2), [2013] 1 All E.R. 349 [17]. 26 Cf R v Friel [2012] EWCA Crim 2871, [26], 27 Neill v North Antrim Magistrates' Court [1992] 1 W.L.R. 1220, 1230; Matthews (Charles) v The State (2000) 60 WIR 390, 402; ......
-
Japhet Bennet v The Queen
...the risks of unreliability and (3) the extent to which the reliability of the evidence can safely be tested and assessed by the jury. [2012] EWCA Crim 2871 23 The requirement that the jury must have sufficient tools to test and assess the hearsay evidence also figures prominently in the Ca......
-
R v A.C.
...Chamber, the approach to be taken by the courts in this area can be readily and shortly summarised. As Gross LJ described the position in R v Friel [2012] EWCA Crim. 2871 at paragraph 18: "As is hornbook law, the basic rule at common law that hearsay evidence was inadmissible in criminal. T......
Request a trial to view additional results