AG v Warren and Others [2009] JRC 060C (02 April 2009)

AG v Warren and Others [2009] JRC 060C (02 April 2009)

Transcripts of covert surveillance recordings are admissible as working documents for the jury, but must be limited to the actual recorded speech, with commentary, slang explanations, and identification of speakers excluded unless agreed or proved by independent evidence. Only relevant and audible parts are admissible. Conversations with customs officers are admissible as no unfairness or legal requirement for caution was established.

Citation
[2009] JRC 060C
Parties
Prosecution: Attorney General; Defendant: Curtis Warren; Defendant: John Alan Welsh; Defendant: James O'Brien; Defendant: Jason Woodward; Defendant: Paul Hunt; Defendant: Oliver Lucas; Amicus: Advocate R. Tremoceiro
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
02 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Ruling on Admissibility and Case Management
Outcome
applications granted in part and refused in part
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Transcripts, Covert Surveillance, Jury Directions, Fair Trial
Criminal Law Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Transcripts Covert Surveillance Jury Directions Fair Trial

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Prosecution

Curtis Warren

Defendant

John Alan Welsh

Defendant

James O'Brien

Defendant

Jason Woodward

Defendant

Paul Hunt

Defendant

Oliver Lucas

Defendant

Advocate R. Tremoceiro

Amicus

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial Ruling on Admissibility and Case Management

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether transcripts of covert audio surveillance recordings are admissible as evidence and in what form
  2. 2 Whether commentary, identification of speakers, slang explanations, and irrelevant or inaudible passages should be included in transcripts provided to the jury
  3. 3 Whether conversations between a defendant and customs officers are admissible without caution under Jersey or French law

Ratio Decidendi

Transcripts of covert surveillance recordings are admissible as working documents for the jury, but must be limited to the actual recorded speech, with commentary, slang explanations, and identification of speakers excluded unless agreed or proved by independent evidence. Only relevant and audible parts are admissible. Conversations with customs officers are admissible as no unfairness or legal requirement for caution was established.

Court Disposition

applications granted in part and refused in part

Orders

  • Transcripts to be provided to the jury must contain only recorded speech, with all commentary, slang explanations, and speaker identification removed unless agreed or proved.
  • Dates and times may be included but are not mandatory absent agreement.