R v William White Watts
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1863 |
| Date | 01 January 1863 |
| Court | Crown Court |
English Reports Citation: 169 E.R. 1422
Crown Cases
S. C. 3 New Rep 175, 33 L. J M. C 63, 9 L. T. 453; 27 J. P. 821, 12 W. R. 112; 9 Cox C. C. 395. Referred to, Ex parte Huguet, 1873, 29 L T. 41.
[339] 1863. eegina v. william white watts. (In order to render the depositions taken before the magistrate admissible in evidence, under the 11 & 12 Viet. c. 42, s. 17, upon the trial of a prisoner, they must be taken in his presence and in that of the magistrate, and the prisoner must have an opportunity of cross-examining the witnesses in the magistrate's presence. The witnesses were examined before the magistrate and in the presence of the prisoner, who had an opportunity of cross-examining them , and the heads of what they could prove were taken down by a clerk. Another clerk then examined the witnesses from these heads, and wrote down their answers, in the absence of the magistrate but in the presence of the prisoner, who, however, was not asked to and did not cross-examine them ; and the witnesses signed the statements so taken. These statements were afterwards read over to the witnesses in the presence of the magistrate and of the prisoner, but the latter was not asked to cross-examine the witnesses The magistrate thereupon signed these statements, and returned them as the depositions in the case. Held, that they were improperly taken, and could not be used upon the trial in the absence of one of the witnesses ) [S. C. 3 New Rep 175 , 33 L. J M. C 63 , 9 L. T. 453 ; 27 J. P. 821 , 12 W. R. 112 ; 9 Cox C. C. 395. Referred to, Ex parte Huyuet, 1873, 29 L T. 41.] The following case was stated by the Assistant Barrister to the Recorder of Liverpool. The prisoner was tried before me, at a Court of Quarter Sessions of the peace, holden in and for the borough of Liverpool on the 25th day of May, a.d. 1863 ; he was indicted for larceny from his master It was proved that one of the witnesses examined before the committing magistrate was unable to attend the trial as a witness, by reason of illness. It was then proposed, on behalf of the prosecution, to put in evidence his LE. &CA. 340. REGINA V. WILLIAM WHITE WATTS 1423 deposition taken before the committing magistrate ; and for this purpose a witness was called, who proved that the deposition was taken in accordance with the invariable and long-established practice of the magistrate's Court; that, when the prisoner was before the magistrate, he was defended by an attorney, who...
To continue reading
Request your trial