R v Myers

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date24 July 1997
Date24 July 1997
CourtHouse of Lords
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
46 cases
  • R v Hurley
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 20 December 2016
    ...would have been admissible at trial, both against McGhee and in favour of the Applicant under the law as it was later declared to be in R v Myers [1998] AC 124. In any event it would now be admissible as hearsay under one of the hearsay provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Is there ......
  • Donna Murphy V. Her Majesty's Advocate
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court of Justiciary
    • 30 May 2012
    ...not to lead the content of the later statements, as not being Cadder compliant, did not prevent the appellant from so doing (R v Myers [1998] AC 124, [1996] Cr App Rep 335). The later statements had been "mixed" and therefore admissible. The co‑accused had been able to rely on the statement......
  • Baker v R
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 15 August 2012
    ...another representation to which it is reasonably necessary to refer in order to understand the representation.’ 27 [1993] 2 Qd R 572. 28 [1998] AC 124. 29Section 76A(1) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (UK) provides that ‘[i]n any proceedings a confession made by an accused pers......
  • R v Muktar Ibrahim and Others
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 23 April 2008
    ...Whether or not the evidence of the confession is relied on by the Crown, it may be admissible at the behest of the co-accused ( R v Myers [1998] AC 124). Section 76 A (2) of PACE introduced a number of pre-conditions to the introduction by one co-accused of the evidence of another co-accuse......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
8 books & journal articles
  • Admissibility in Criminal Proceedings of Third Party and Real Evidence Obtained by Methods Prohibited by UNCAT
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 10-1, February 2006
    • 1 February 2006
    ...Jury’ (2005) 64 Camb LJ 678.292 This might be because the defendant is an agent or former leader of that state.293 R v Myers [1998] AC 124, Lobban v R [1995] 1 WLR 877. But see PACE, s. 76A(2).294 E. Greenspan, ‘Lowering the Threshold for Admissibility of Defence Evidence in a CriminalCase’......
  • Criminal Justice Act 2003: Bad Character Provisions
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 70-5, October 2006
    • 1 October 2006
    ...a co-accused might be able to deploy evidencewhich might have been excluded in respect of the prosecution (see, forexample, R v Myers [1998] AC 124). This position recognises the distinctinterests of the co-accused and the prosecution; the stakes for the formerare of course considerably hig......
  • Confessions and the Criminal Justice Act 2003
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage Journal of Criminal Law, The No. 77-3, June 2013
    • 1 June 2013
    ...Justice Act 2003 coming into force (but subsequent to the Law Commission’s Report) see the decision of the House ofLords in R v Myers [1998] AC 124. 8 Law Commission, above n. 1 at para. 8.95.9 Ibid. at para. 8.96. 232 Confessions and the Criminal Justice Act 2003 . . . the Law Commission w......
  • Subject Index
    • United Kingdom
    • Sage International Journal of Evidence & Proof, The No. 8-4, December 2004
    • 1 December 2004
    ...Rollock[2004] UKHL 2, [2004] 2 WLR 201........................................... 186–190R v Momo [2001] EWCA Crim 397 .. 175R v My ers [1998] AC 124. .. 165, 170, 175,177, 178R v Neale (1977) 65 Cr App R 304 ... 169R v Noonan [2003] EWCA Crim 3869.................................................
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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