AG v Porter [2024] JRC 067 (25 March 2024)

On balance, after considering the factors in Article 64(2), the court preferred the defence arguments and ruled it was in the interests of justice for the child's hearsay evidence to be admitted.

Source-derived case information.

Citation: [2024] JRC 067
Parties: Prosecution: The Crown; Defendant: The Defendant
Jurisdiction: Jersey
Judgment Date: 25 March 2024
Procedural Posture: Criminal / Trial Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence
Outcome: application granted
Legal Topics: Hearsay Evidence, Admissibility of Child Witness Statements, Interests of Justice, Police Procedures and Criminal Evidence (jersey) Law 2003

Criminal Law Evidence Law Hearsay Evidence Admissibility of Child Witness Statements Interests of Justice Police Procedures and Criminal Evidence (jersey) Law 2003

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2

Parties

The Crown

Prosecution

The Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence

Legal Issues

1 Whether hearsay evidence of a child witness should be admitted at trial under Article 64(1)(d) of the Police Procedures and Criminal Evidence (Jersey) Law 2003

Ratio Decidendi

On balance, after considering the factors in Article 64(2), the court preferred the defence arguments and ruled it was in the interests of justice for the child's hearsay evidence to be admitted.

Court Disposition

application granted

Orders

The child's hearsay evidence is admitted at trial.

About this LexChat collection

Publisher and coverage

LexChat is published by Esheria. Coverage reflects the case law currently mapped from identified source collections; it may be incomplete, delayed, or later corrected. The official source controls where it differs from this research page.

AI and research method

Source-derived facts are shown separately from AI-generated material. If an AI summary is available, it is explicitly labelled and remains a non-authoritative research aid.

Corrections and reporting

Report a source mismatch, factual issue, personal-data concern, or licensing question to support@esheria.co.ke. Include this page's URL and the supporting official source so the record can be reviewed, corrected, restricted, or withdrawn.

Legal-information disclaimer

LexChat provides legal information and research tools, not legal advice. Verify currency, status, citations, and jurisdiction with authoritative sources and a qualified professional where appropriate.