Crown Allowed to Revive Witness Memory Using Document
📌 In brief
In a criminal trial, the court allowed the Crown to help a witness recall telephone numbers by referring to a previous statement. This decision was made considering the importance of the evidence and the lack of unfairness to the accused.
📖 What the law says
Under this rule, a witness cannot use a document to try to remember a fact or opinion during testimony unless the court grants permission. The court considers factors like whether the witness can recall the information without the document and whether the document was created or confirmed by the witness when the events were fresh in their mind.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a legal practitioner.
📚 Full judgment
The summary, holding and questions above are VadeLab’s own material. The official decision itself is published by the court, and we do not reproduce it on this page.
📄 Read the full judgment⚖️ View on the official court website ↗
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The witness found the record of the telephone numbers to be accurate at the time he made the statement.
- The statement was made close to the time the events occurred, indicating the information was fresh in the witness's memory.
- Forcing the Crown to prove the telephone numbers by other means would unnecessarily prolong the trial.
- The evidence involving the telephone numbers is crucial to the serious criminal charges, including murder and attempted murder.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The witness's memory of the telephone numbers was not considered fresh enough at the time of the application.
- The application under s 32 of the Evidence Act was initially met with skepticism due to the passage of time since the statement was made.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether a witness could refer to a document to recall telephone numbers during a criminal trial.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant the Crown's application because the evidence was important and there was no unfairness to the accused.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the evidence was important and recalling the numbers was necessary for the trial.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the Crown, who brought the application.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The witness statement made on 1 August 2014 was the key document referred to in the application.