AG -v- Bennett [2014] JRC 130 (11 June 2014)

AG -v- Bennett [2014] JRC 130 (11 June 2014)

The court found that the admission of Police Constable Howard's statement at this stage does not prejudice the Defence and is reasonable in light of the new evidence introduced by the defence witness. The evidence is therefore permitted as rebuttal evidence.

Citation
[2014] JRC 130
Parties
Prosecution: Prosecution; Defence: Defence; Complainant: Justin Sumrie; Defence Witness: Dionne Gilbert
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
11 June 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Evidentiary Ruling During Trial
Outcome
application granted
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Rebuttal Evidence, Timing of Evidence Submission
Criminal Law Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Rebuttal Evidence Timing of Evidence Submission

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prosecution

Prosecution

Defence

Defence

Justin Sumrie

Complainant

Dionne Gilbert

Defence Witness

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Evidentiary Ruling During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the statement of Police Constable Howard is admissible as rebuttal evidence after the defence witness's testimony.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the admission of Police Constable Howard's statement at this stage does not prejudice the Defence and is reasonable in light of the new evidence introduced by the defence witness. The evidence is therefore permitted as rebuttal evidence.

Court Disposition

application granted

Orders

  • Prosecution permitted to lead the statement of Police Constable Howard in agreed form.