AG -v- T [2014] JRC 103 (06 May 2014)

AG -v- T [2014] JRC 103 (06 May 2014)

The evidence sought to be explored is far too remote and does not touch directly or indirectly on the credit of the complainant; extending the issue would be misleading and wholly irrelevant to the matters the jury must decide.

Citation
[2014] JRC 103
Parties
Complainant: Witness H; Defendant: Defendant; Prosecution: Crown
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
06 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Ruling
Outcome
application refused
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Relevance, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Admissibility of Evidence Relevance Jury Directions

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Witness H

Complainant

Defendant

Defendant

Crown

Prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence of a threat by Witness B to Witness G is admissible and relevant to the animus of the complainant Witness H towards the defendant

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence sought to be explored is far too remote and does not touch directly or indirectly on the credit of the complainant; extending the issue would be misleading and wholly irrelevant to the matters the jury must decide.

Court Disposition

application refused

Orders

  • Exploration of the alleged threat by Witness B to Witness G before the jury is not permitted