R v Francis
| Jurisdiction | Caribbean States |
| Judgment Date | 2009 |
| Date | 2009 |
| Court | Caribbean Court of Justice (Appellate Jurisdiction) |
-
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
View this document and try vLex for 7 days - TRY VLEX
- This document is available in original version only for vLex customers
4 cases
-
Theresa Anne Marie Justin Appellant v The Queen Respondent
...by the police would not have precluded the reception of oral evidence of the confrontations or make the oral evidence inadmissible. R v Francis (2009) 74 WIR 108 applied. 3. The learned judge adequately conveyed to the jury the fact that there was an absence of forensic evidence in support......
-
Justin v the Queen
...was not produced in court does not preclude the reception of oral evidence of the confrontations or make the oral evidence inadmissible. ( R v. Francis (2009) 74 WIR 108.) I agree with the Director of Public Prosecutions that there was no need for the trial judge to warn the jury that the ......
-
Sealy v the Queen
...ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT 8 The appellant challenged the Court of Appeal's conclusion that Francis v. The Queen [ [2009] CCJ 9 (AJ), (2009) 74 WIR 108] settled the issue of whether a police officer may read into evidence unauthenticated oral statements attributed to an accused. He submitt......
-
Clarence Elloyd Sealy Appellant v The Queen Respondent
...J. Wit The Hon Mr Justice Wit /s/ D. Hayton The Hon Mr Justice Hayton /s/ W. Anderson The Hon Mr Justice Anderson 1 [2009] CCJ 9 (AJ), (2009) 74 WIR 108. 2 The Evidence Act 1994, Chapter 121 of the Laws of Barbados (Evidence 3 (1991) HCA 6, [1990–1991] 171 CLR 468. 4 For example, the Act s......
1 books & journal articles
-
Five years of CCJ's contribution to Caribbean Jurisprudence
...his memory from such a record for the purpose of giving evidence of an oral admission by 32 [2009] CCJ 1 (AJ), 33 (2009)74 WIR 92* 34 (2009) 74 WIR 108. the accused. The document from which he refreshed his memory was not put into evidence. The Court held that there was nothing in the Evide......