Hearsay and Dying Declarations in Law
40 Questions
1 Views

Hearsay and Dying Declarations in Law

Created by
@RomanticJacksonville

Podcast Beta

Play an AI-generated podcast conversation about this lesson

Questions and Answers

In Patel v Comptroller of Customs, why was the evidence of bags labeled 'produce of morocco' deemed inadmissible?

  • It was considered too vague.
  • It was not relevant to the case.
  • It was hearsay due to lack of knowledge of the writer. (correct)
  • It contradicted other evidence.

    • In the case of Chandrasekera, the witness's nod was considered admissible evidence.

    False

    What type of evidence was presented in Gibson that was ruled inadmissible?

    Evidence of conduct and oral assertion.

    In Wright v Tatham, the evidence presented was an implied assertion about the victim being _____ by her husband.

    <p>murdered</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the following cases with their main focus regarding hearsay:

    <p>Patel v Comptroller of Customs = Admissibility of bag labels as evidence Chandrasekera = Witness reacting to a question Gibson = Victim's conduct post-attack Subramanium v Public Prosecutor = Defense against possession of ammunition</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following describes the outcome of the ruling in R v Rattern?

    <p>It was related to implied assertions.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    A statement made to illustrate that it was said is considered hearsay.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In the context of hearsay, what must a statement prove to be considered inadmissible?

    <p>It must be adduced to prove the truth of its contents.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is required for a statement to be considered hearsay?

    <p>It is used to establish the truth of the statement.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The statements made by the defendant are admissible if they aim to show the truth of their contents.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In the context of the appeal, what is being established about the defendant's statements?

    <p>The state of mind of the defendant.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    A third person who hears orders given to another may provide evidence of the fact that such orders were given, but not the __________ of the orders.

    <p>truth</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the following cases with their key outcomes:

    <p>Subramanium v DPP = Confirmed admissibility of evidence to establish facts, not truth Mutambo v the People = Evidence deemed inadmissible as not relevant to the facts in issue Shamwana v the People = Cited Subramanium for supporting evidence relevance</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following describes an instance where a statement is NOT considered hearsay?

    <p>When it aims to show what was believed by the listener.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Hearsay statements can be admissible if they are used to establish the fact that they were made.

    <p>True</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is the primary focus of evidence related to statements made by the defendant?

    <p>The belief of the defendant regarding the statements.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Which of the following is NOT one of the three important criteria for dying declarations to be admissible?

    <p>Witnesses present at the declaration</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Dying declarations can be admitted in any type of case, regardless of the circumstances.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What must be the mental state of a declarant for their dying declaration to be considered admissible?

    <p>The declarant must have abandoned all hope to live.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Dying declarations are admissible as hearsay evidence if the declarant believes they are meeting their _____ .

    <p>creator</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In the case of R v Perry, what did the judge need to determine regarding the deceased's statement?

    <p>Whether the deceased had any hope of life.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Declarations made against a person's own interest are always admissible.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is one of the limitations for declarations against interest?

    <p>The declarant must be dead.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the cases with their relevant aspect regarding dying declarations:

    <p>R v Perry = Test for imminent death Mulenga v The People = N/A Nicholas Malaya v The People = N/A Steven Mukuka v The People = N/A</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is the primary purpose of the statements made during a breach of contract case?

    <p>To show that an acceptance was made</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In a defamation case, proving that words were uttered does not require establishing the truth of those words.

    <p>True</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What was the significant outcome of the Woodhouse v Hall case regarding the state of mind?

    <p>Evidence was provided to establish that offers for sex were made, not the truth of those offers.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In the case of Rattern, evidence from a telephone operator was used to establish the victim's __________.

    <p>state of mind</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the case with its key focus:

    <p>Mutambo = Showing orders were given Woodhouse v Hall = Establishing offers for sex Davidson v Quirke = Proving bets were made Rattern = Victim's state of mind</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What was the nature of the evidence in Davidson v Quirke?

    <p>Evidence proving that calls were made</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Hearsay evidence can never be admissible in court.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What two meanings did the evidence from the telephone operator in Rattern convey?

    <p>It proved that a call was made and illustrated the caller's hysterical state of mind.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is the primary concern when determining the admissibility of a statement under 'res gestae'?

    <p>Whether the statement was made under overwhelming circumstances.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The principle of 'res gestae' requires that statements must be made simultaneously with the action.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    In the case of Bedingfield, why was the woman's statement deemed inadmissible?

    <p>It was made after the throat cutting had occurred.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The court in the John Nguni case analyzed the exception to hearsay evidence mainly through ______.

    <p>res gestae</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What action did the deceased take upon returning with a cut throat in the John Nguni case?

    <p>Accused the accused of the attack.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Match the following legal principles with their definitions:

    <p>Res Gestae = Spontaneous utterances made during or immediately after a shocking event Hearsay = Testimony that is secondhand or not from a witness of the event Reflective faculties = The ability to think and reason before speaking Spontaneity = The quality of being unplanned and impulsive</p> Signup and view all the answers

    What is the main requirement for a statement to be considered spontaneous under the 'res gestae' rule?

    <p>It must be made while the maker is overpowered by an overwhelming event.</p> Signup and view all the answers

    The possibility of concoction or distortion is significant in assessing statements made under stress.

    <p>False</p> Signup and view all the answers

    Study Notes

    Hearsay Definition

    • An assertion made other than one made by a witness giving oral testimony is inadmissible as proof of the facts asserted.

    Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay

    • Statements made by a person who has abandoned all hope of survival may be admissible as hearsay evidence.
    • Courts have stated that the state of mind of such a person would be similar to the state of mind of a person giving an oath, where the possibility of concoction would be less and the possibility of veracity great.
    • Dying Declarations must meet these criteria:
      • Only admissible in homicide cases
      • Must reveal the identity of the accused
      • Declarant must be dead

     Dying Declarations: R v Perry

    • The accused was convicted of the murder of a girl who died as a result of an illegal operation.
    • The court considered the admissibility of a declaration made by the deceased.
    • The court in this case held that the test to be applied is ‘whether all hope of life has been abandoned so that the person making the statement thinks that death must follow’.
    • The judge at trial ought to consider if the death of the deceased was imminent at the time the declaration was made, and determine from the language used by the deceased whether the statement was made at a time when the deceased had a settled hopeless expectation of death.

    Declarations Against Interest

    • The basis of this exception is that it is unlikely for a person to lie in relation to declarations made against his own interest.
    • This exception has these limitations:
      • Declarant must be dead

    Res Gestae: Initial Application

    • This exception was previously applied strictly, requiring the words spoken to be uttered at the same time as the action, so that any lapse of time would render them inadmissible.
    • In the case of Bedingfiled, a woman who had been attacked by the accused, ran outside with a cut throat and said to her Aunt, “look what Bedingfield has done to me”.
    • The court stated that this statement was inadmissible as it occurred after the throat cutting and the res had been completed.

    John Nguni Case: Res Gestae Test

    • The accused was accused of murdering the deceased.
    • It was disputed whether evidence given by three witnesses testifying that, when the accused went out with the deceased, the deceased came back with a cut throat stating “look what John Nguni did to me”.
    • The court applied the principles established in the Australian case of Rattern to its current decision.
    • The test is thus: was the statement made whilst the maker was overpowered by some overwhelming event in such proximity, although not contemporaneous, as to make it spontaneous and thus inhibit her reflective faculties?
    • In such a situation, the possibility of concoction or distortion to the advantage of the maker and disadvantage of the accused may be disregarded.

    Studying That Suits You

    Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.

    Quiz Team

    Related Documents

    Law Of Evidence PDF

    Description

    This quiz evaluates your understanding of hearsay definitions and the exceptions to the rule against hearsay, specifically focusing on dying declarations. Test your knowledge on crucial legal principles and case law, including R v Perry.

    More Like This

    Use Quizgecko on...
    Browser
    Open
    Browser
    Browser