30 Aug 2017
c4b3a677-e69c-4b26-a243-9448d77da3f4.pdf
- Citation
- openlaw-a7b89015_6d1d_4e97_9de3_9699226c9222.pdf
- Court
- Court of Appeal
A six‑hour, discursive evidential video interview containing substantial irrelevant and inadmissible material was not a satisfactory foundation to be played as the complainant's evidence‑in‑chief; editing could not reliably salvage it, therefore the appeal was allowed and the complainant must give evidence orally at trial either by CCTV or from behind screens; publication of the judgment and proceedings in news media or on the internet is prohibited until final disposition of the trial (law report/digest publication permitted).