The Law of Evidence Fact Sheets - Hearsay
HEARSAY - INTRODUCTION This fact sheet describes the complicated area of the law of evidence relating to hearsay, in criminal cases.
DEFINITIONS Hearsay evidence has been given many definitions as it has been interpreted and reinterpreted by the courts. A useful starting point is the definition found in the Civil Evidence Act 1995 section 1, which, although it applies to hearsay in civil cases, is a clear definition of hearsay based on common law cases, which form the basis of how hearsay evidence is treated in criminal cases; “Hearsay evidence can be thought of as:- any statement made otherwise than by a person while giving oral evidence in the proceedings, which is tendered as evidence of the matters stated.” For the purposes of the hearsay rules, “statement” applies equally to those made orally, to those made by a gesture (e.g., nodding of a head) and those in documents. Examples of hearsay statements in documents can be found in witness statements read out by solicitors etc. in court; public analyst certificates, and records from businesses, e.g., temperature monitoring records. Case law has set out guidelines as to when a statement is or isn’t hearsay, and often lengthy legal argument takes place to determine the exact status of the statement (the evidence) in order to determine its admissibility. Some examples of statements held not to be hearsay include those repeated by others to show only that a statement in question was actually made (Subramanium v PP) or that somebody in question can speak, for example. Statements that have been held to be hearsay include documents from a factory, assembly line (Myers v DPP); somebody nodding in agreement to a question (where their throat had been cut); and phone calls to a drug dealer’s house asking for the usual supply of drugs. The cases have shown that statements do not have to be blatant examples but could be statements that on the face of it are not repeated to prove the facts stated, but on reflection imply that the facts suggested are true. However, even the cases dealing with these so-called “implied assertions” are unclear and often conflicting. The message is; if a statement is made about something someone else did, or said etc., there will probably be an argument in court as to whether that statement is hearsay!
THE GENERAL RULE The general rule at common law is that hearsay evidence is inadmissible unless it falls within a common law or statutory exception.
Copyright Dr Richard Jones 1999
-1-