|
R V U (FJ)
''R v U (FJ)'' is a leading case of the Supreme Court of Canada. In the decision the court modified the requirements of admissibility of prior statements. In ''R v B (KG)'', the court required that prior statements can only be admitted for the truth of its contents where it was under oath and videotaped. In UFJ, the court permitted a less strict standard. The complainants prior statement was admitted for the truth of its contents without being under oath or videotaped where the statement was corroborated by the accused confession. The enhanced reliability of the corroboration and the opportunity to cross-examine the recanting witness was sufficient to remove much of the dangers associated with prior statements. References R. v. U. (F.J.) 1995 CanLII 74 (SCC), 995 Year 995 ( CMXCV) was a common year starting on Tuesday (link will display the full calendar) of the Julian calendar. Events By place Japan * 17 May - Fujiwara no Michitaka (imperial regent) dies. * 3 June ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Supreme Court Of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC; french: Cour suprême du Canada, CSC) is the Supreme court, highest court in the Court system of Canada, judicial system of Canada. It comprises List of Justices of the Supreme Court of Canada, nine justices, whose decisions are the ultimate application of Canadian law, and grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal Appeal, appellate courts. The Supreme Court is bijural, hearing cases from two major legal traditions (common law and Civil law (legal system), civil law) and bilingual, hearing cases in both Official bilingualism in Canada, official languages of Canada (English language, English and French language, French). The effects of any judicial decision on the common law, on the interpretation of statutes, or on any other application of law, can, in effect, be nullified by legislation, unless the particular decision of the court in question involves applicatio ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Prior Consistent Statements And Prior Inconsistent Statements
Prior consistent statements and prior inconsistent statements, in the law of evidence, occur where a witness, testifying at trial (law), trial, makes a statement that is either consistent or inconsistent, respectively, with a previous statement given at an earlier time such as during a discovery (law), discovery, interview, or interrogation. The examiner can witness impeachment, impeach the witness when an inconsistent statement is found, and may conversely bolster the credibility of an impeached witness with a prior consistent statement. Impeachment with a prior inconsistent statement Before the witness can be impeached the examiner must have extrinsic evidence of the prior statement. The examiner must also provide the witness with the opportunity to adopt or reject the previous statement. In the majority of U.S. jurisdictions, prior inconsistent statements may not be introduced to prove the truth of the prior statement itself, as this constitutes Hearsay in the United States, he ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V B (KG)
''R v B (KG)'', 9931 SCR 740, popularly known as the KGB case, is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the admissibility of prior inconsistent statements as proof of the truth of their contents. Prior to this case, prior inconsistent statements made by a witness other than an accused could merely be used to impeach the witness's credibility, not for substantive purposes. Here, the Court held that if the statements could be found to be both necessary and reliable then the statements could be admitted as an exception to the hearsay rule. Background Four youths were involved in a fight with two men. One youth pulled out a knife and stabbed one of the men, killing him. During the investigation each youth was interviewed on camera in the presence of family or their lawyer. In three of the statements, reference was made to death likely being caused by K.G.B., one of the four youths. At trial, however, the youths recanted their videotaped statements and claimed they had lied t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Oath
Traditionally an oath (from Anglo-Saxon ', also called plight) is either a statement of fact or a promise taken by a sacrality as a sign of verity. A common legal substitute for those who conscientiously object to making sacred oaths is to give an affirmation instead. Nowadays, even when there is no notion of sanctity involved, certain promises said out loud in ceremonial or juridical purpose are referred to as oaths. "To swear" is a verb used to describe the taking of an oath, to making a solemn vow. Etymology The word come from Anglo-Saxon ' judicial swearing, solemn appeal to deity in witness of truth or a promise," from Proto-Germanic '' *aiþaz'' (source also of Old Norse eiðr, Swedish ed, Old Saxon, Old Frisian eth, Middle Dutch eet, Dutch eed, German Eid, Gothic aiþs "oath"), from PIE *oi-to- "an oath" (source also of Old Irish oeth "oath"). Common to Celtic and Germanic, possibly a loan-word from one to the other, but the history is obscure and it may ultimately ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Complainant
A plaintiff ( Π in legal shorthand) is the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an ''action'') before a court. By doing so, the plaintiff seeks a legal remedy. If this search is successful, the court will issue judgment in favor of the plaintiff and make the appropriate court order (e.g., an order for damages). "Plaintiff" is the term used in civil cases in most English-speaking jurisdictions, the notable exceptions being England and Wales, where a plaintiff has, since the introduction of the Civil Procedure Rules in 1999, been known as a "claimant" and Scotland, where the party has always been known as the "pursuer". In criminal cases, the prosecutor brings the case against the defendant, but the key complaining party is often called the "complainant". In some jurisdictions, a lawsuit is commenced by filing a summons, claim form or a complaint. These documents are known as pleadings, that set forth the alleged wrongs committed by the defendant or defendants with a demand ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Cross-examine
In law, cross-examination is the interrogation of a witness called by one's opponent. It is preceded by direct examination (in Ireland, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, South Africa, India and Pakistan known as examination-in-chief) and may be followed by a redirect (re-examination in Ireland, England, Scotland, Australia, Canada, South Africa, India, Hong Kong, and Pakistan). Redirect examination, performed by the attorney or pro se individual who performed the direct examination, clarifies the witness' testimony provided during cross-examination including any subject matter raised during cross-examination but not discussed during direct examination. Recross examination addresses the witness' testimony discussed in redirect by the opponent. Depending on the judge's discretion, opponents are allowed multiple opportunities to redirect and recross examine witnesses (may vary by jurisdiction). Variations by jurisdiction In the United States federal Courts, a cross-examini ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Canadian Evidence Case Law
Canadians (french: Canadiens) are people identified with the country of Canada. This connection may be residential, legal, historical or cultural. For most Canadians, many (or all) of these connections exist and are collectively the source of their being ''Canadian''. Canada is a multilingual and multicultural society home to people of groups of many different ethnic, religious, and national origins, with the majority of the population made up of Old World immigrants and their descendants. Following the initial period of French and then the much larger British colonization, different waves (or peaks) of immigration and settlement of non-indigenous peoples took place over the course of nearly two centuries and continue today. Elements of Indigenous, French, British, and more recent immigrant customs, languages, and religions have combined to form the culture of Canada, and thus a Canadian identity. Canada has also been strongly influenced by its linguistic, geographic, and ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Supreme Court Of Canada Cases
The Supreme Court of Canada is the court of last resort and final appeal in Canada. Cases that are successfully appealed to the Court are generally of national importance. Once a case is decided the Court will publish written reasons for the decision that consist of one or more reasons from any number of the nine justices. Understanding the background of the cases, their reasons and the authorship can be important and insightful as each judge may have varying beliefs in legal theory and understanding. List of cases by Court era * List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Richards Court through Fauteux Court): This list includes cases from the formation of the Court on April 8, 1875, through to the retirement of Gérald Fauteux on December 23, 1973. * List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Laskin Court): This list includes cases from the rise of Bora Laskin through to his death on March 26, 1984. * List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Dickson Court): This list includes cases from t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.jpg "Click for more on -> Cross-examine")
