S v Malumo and Others (13) (32 of 2001) [2011] NAHC 344 (17 November 2011)

S v Malumo and Others (13) (32 of 2001) [2011] NAHC 344 (17 November 2011)

The objections are overruled because the requirements for refreshing memory have been satisfied; contemporaneity and authorship are not strict requirements, and undated documents do not preclude refreshing memory.

Citation
[2011] NAHC 344
Parties
Prosecution: The State; Defendant: Calvin Liseli Malumo & 111 Others
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Namibia
Judgment Date
17 November 2011
Case Number
32 of 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Ruling on Objection
Outcome
Objection overruled
Legal Topics
Refreshing Memory of Witness, Admissibility of Evidence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Refreshing Memory of Witness Admissibility of Evidence

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The State

Prosecution

Calvin Liseli Malumo & 111 Others

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Ruling on Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the witness may refresh memory from documents under the circumstances
  2. 2 Whether contemporaneity and authorship of documents are mandatory for refreshing memory

Ratio Decidendi

The objections are overruled because the requirements for refreshing memory have been satisfied; contemporaneity and authorship are not strict requirements, and undated documents do not preclude refreshing memory.

Court Disposition

Objection overruled

Orders

  • State to proceed with evidence in respect of proving the third requirement of verification of the document