R v Cochrane

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Date1993
CourtCourt of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
8 cases
  • DPP v Power
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 24 April 2018
    ... ... 91 The trial judge was referred to R v Cochrane [1993] Crim L. Rev 48 ; The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v. Murphy [2005] 2 I.R. 125 and The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v. Meehan [2006] 3 I.R. 468 ... 92 Counsel for the respondent contends that the printout was admissible as real ... ...
  • DPP v Murphy
    • Ireland
    • Court of Criminal Appeal
    • 21 January 2005
    ...v Cross [1984] 1 WLR 1372; R v Spiby (1990) 91 Cr App R 186; R v Governor of Brixton Prison, exp Levin [1997] AC 741 and R v Cochrane [1993] Crim LR 48 followed - Corroboration - Non jury trial - Admissions made by accused - Nature of corroboration - Credland v Knowler (1951) 35 Cr App R 48......
  • The People (Director of Public Prosecutions) v A. McD
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 14 December 2016
    ...in Murphy stated that the cited authorities as discussed in that judgment must now be read subject to the decision in R. v. Cochrane (1993) Crim. L.R. 48 (‘ R. v. Cochrane’), in which it was held by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) that before the judge could decide whether the compu......
  • DPP v Brian Meehan
    • Ireland
    • Court of Criminal Appeal
    • 24 July 2006
    ...of human mind the record made by the machine is admissible. 43 Such authorities must be read subject to the decision in R v. Cochrane [1993] Crim LR 48, in which it was held by the Court of Appeal that before the judge can decide whether computer printouts are admissible, whether as real ev......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
  • Subject Index
    • United Kingdom
    • International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 12-4, November 2008
    • 1 November 2008
    ...Court,9 November1999 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93R vClive B [2004]EWCA Crim 1254 . . . . . . . . . 279R vCochrane [1993] CrimLR 48 . . . . . . . . . . . . 296R vCooke [1995] 1Cr App R318 . . . . . . . . . . . .279R vCooper [1969] 1QB 267 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .163R......
  • Authenticating ‘Things’ in English Law: Principles for Adducing Tangible Evidence in Common Law Jury Trials
    • United Kingdom
    • International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 12-4, November 2008
    • 1 November 2008
    ...‘THINGS’ IN ENGLISH LAW187 RvNazeer [1998] Crim LR 750, per Beldam LJ. Cf. RvGarvey [2001] EWCA Crim 1365 at [72].188 RvCochrane [1993] Crim LR 48.189 RvMinors [1989] 1 WLR 441 at 448.190 PACE, Sched. 3, para. 8.191 Law Commission, Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Hearsay and Related Topic......
  • Downloads, Logs and Captures: Evidence from Cyberspace
    • United Kingdom
    • Journal of Financial Crime No. 5-2, April 1997
    • 1 April 1997
    ...of practical interpretation. See Reed, C. (1990-91) 2 CLSR 13-16 and two contrasting cases: R ν Shephard [1993] AC 380 and R ν Cochrane [1993] Crim LR 48. Section 69 is likely to go as recommended in the Law Commission's Report Law Com No 245 'Evidence in Criminal Proceedings: Hearsay and R......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT