Podcast
Questions and Answers
What could have likely succeeded if the complainant was not cross-examined?
What could have likely succeeded if the complainant was not cross-examined?
- A no case submission (correct)
- An appeal to a higher court
- A guilty verdict
- A full trial
The accused had legal representation during the trial.
The accused had legal representation during the trial.
False (B)
Who provided evidence via Skype during the trial?
Who provided evidence via Skype during the trial?
Emili Grace
The trial commenced on _____ July 2011.
The trial commenced on _____ July 2011.
Match the following terms with their definitions:
Match the following terms with their definitions:
Which court handled the trial of the appellant?
Which court handled the trial of the appellant?
The learned trial judge had no need to follow procedures when admitting evidence via Skype.
The learned trial judge had no need to follow procedures when admitting evidence via Skype.
What was a significant issue regarding the trial's conduct?
What was a significant issue regarding the trial's conduct?
What must be considered in relation to an identification being compatible with a fair trial?
What must be considered in relation to an identification being compatible with a fair trial?
A dock identification made via 'skype' is considered reliable.
A dock identification made via 'skype' is considered reliable.
What error did the Judge make regarding the witness's dock identification?
What error did the Judge make regarding the witness's dock identification?
The accused admitted he was the engaging party on the beach that day, which included moving into the ______.
The accused admitted he was the engaging party on the beach that day, which included moving into the ______.
Match the following terms with their descriptions:
Match the following terms with their descriptions:
Under what circumstance should a trial Judge allow dock identification?
Under what circumstance should a trial Judge allow dock identification?
The accused received advice regarding the right to counsel during his trial.
The accused received advice regarding the right to counsel during his trial.
What was the result of the procedural error regarding the dock identification?
What was the result of the procedural error regarding the dock identification?
What must the judge consider before determining if a witness is vulnerable?
What must the judge consider before determining if a witness is vulnerable?
The procedure outlined in Section 295 is optional for judges to follow.
The procedure outlined in Section 295 is optional for judges to follow.
What balance must a judge maintain when dealing with vulnerable witnesses?
What balance must a judge maintain when dealing with vulnerable witnesses?
The judge may receive reports from persons considered qualified to advise on the effect of giving evidence in person on the _____.
The judge may receive reports from persons considered qualified to advise on the effect of giving evidence in person on the _____.
Match the description with the respective action taken by the judge:
Match the description with the respective action taken by the judge:
What is the purpose of holding a chambers hearing concerning vulnerable witnesses?
What is the purpose of holding a chambers hearing concerning vulnerable witnesses?
A judge can disregard the need to write reasons for their decision regarding vulnerable witnesses.
A judge can disregard the need to write reasons for their decision regarding vulnerable witnesses.
What is the significance of Section 296 in relation to Section 295?
What is the significance of Section 296 in relation to Section 295?
What was the main argument of the appellant's defense?
What was the main argument of the appellant's defense?
The appellant admitted to the robbery during the confrontation.
The appellant admitted to the robbery during the confrontation.
What injury did S sustain during the robbery?
What injury did S sustain during the robbery?
The judge withdrew the issue of ________ from the jury during the trial.
The judge withdrew the issue of ________ from the jury during the trial.
Match the witnesses with their statements:
Match the witnesses with their statements:
What did the appellant's companion and neighbor confirm?
What did the appellant's companion and neighbor confirm?
The counsel for the appellant at trial was the same as at the appeal.
The counsel for the appellant at trial was the same as at the appeal.
What did the judge think about the issue of mistaken identification in this case?
What did the judge think about the issue of mistaken identification in this case?
What was the main issue in the case discussed?
What was the main issue in the case discussed?
The defense alleged that there was a mistake in identification.
The defense alleged that there was a mistake in identification.
What must a judge have before leaving an issue to the jury that the defense did not raise?
What must a judge have before leaving an issue to the jury that the defense did not raise?
According to the Turnbull Rules, the warning needs to be given when the case against the accused depends on the correctness of one or more ______ of the accused.
According to the Turnbull Rules, the warning needs to be given when the case against the accused depends on the correctness of one or more ______ of the accused.
Match the case authorities with their corresponding context:
Match the case authorities with their corresponding context:
What is the purpose of the Turnbull warning?
What is the purpose of the Turnbull warning?
The judge was obliged to leave the mistaken identification issue to the jury due to the evidence provided.
The judge was obliged to leave the mistaken identification issue to the jury due to the evidence provided.
What is the potential risk referred to by Lord Widgery regarding fleeting encounters?
What is the potential risk referred to by Lord Widgery regarding fleeting encounters?
Flashcards are hidden until you start studying
Study Notes
Fair Trial & Identification
- A trial judge may refuse a dock identification if the accused refused to participate in a formal identification parade.
- A dock identification by camera directed through "skype" is unreliable and should be avoided.
- A trial judge should consider the accused’s legal representation, the directions given on identification and the strength of the prosecution case.
Trial Without Representation
- The accused was tried in the High Court without legal representation.
- He was not advised of his right to counsel.
- Lack of legal representation prejudiced the accused.
Vulnerable Witness Testimony
- The victim of the alleged rape, Emili Grace, testified via Skype from Sydney, Australia.
- The trial judge should have followed the procedure laid down in Chapter XX of the Criminal Procedure Decree, 2009 for receiving evidence via Skype.
- The judge should ensure that the level of stress of vulnerable witnesses is minimized.
- Before receiving evidence from a vulnerable witness, the judge must hold a chambers hearing with all parties, including the accused present.
Case Summary R v Courtnell
- R v Courtnell case concerned a robbery and wounding.
- The defense was that the identification of the appellant was fabricated.
- The defense argued that the judge should have given a Turnbull direction, even though the evidence did not support mistaken identification.
- The judge was not obliged to leave an issue to the jury if there was no evidence to support it.
- The judge did not err in withdrawing the issue of mistaken identification from the jury.
Turnbull Guidelines
- The Turnbull Guidelines were primarily designed to deal with fleeting encounters.
- The guidelines apply when the case against the accused depends on identification, and the defense alleges that the identification was mistaken.
- If the defense alleges a frame-up, a Turnbull warning is not necessary.
R v Courtnell Precedents
- Several authorities followed R v Courtnell, including:
- R v Cape Jackson and Gardner
- Shand v R
- R.v Beckles and Montagne
R v Courtnell Conclusion
- The issue of mistaken identification does not arise in this case.
- The evidence supported the conclusion that the appellant was identified correctly, and that the defense was fabricated.
- The judge’s refusal to give a Turnbull direction did not prejudice the appellant.
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
