Question 1

Counsel can ask witnesses absolutely anything. The questions must not be, ""merely scandalous or intended or calculated only to vilify, insult or annoy...a witness"" as a rule of common law and under the Bar Code of Conduct.

Accepted Answer

Counsel must not ask questions that are merely scandalous or intended or calculated only to vilify, insult, or annoy a witness, as per the rule of common law and the Bar Code of Conduct.

Question 2

Which of the following are conditions for allowing a witness to refresh their memory whilst giving evidence? Section 139 of the C.J.A. 2003 governs the refreshing of witnesses' memories from documents. It states that it is generally permitted, subject to the two provisos.

Accepted Answer

To refresh their memory, a witness must indicate that the statement represents their recollection of events at the time they made it and their recollection is likely to be significantly better at the time the statement was made or verified. All parties agreeing or a witness refusing to give evidence without help from the statement are not conditions for allowing a witness to refresh their memory.

Question 3

What is the correct order of questioning of a prosecution witness in a trial with 2 defendants?

Accepted Answer

The correct order of questioning in a trial with multiple defendants is as follows: first, the prosecution conducts examination-in-chief, then the defense counsel for defendant 1 conducts cross-examination, followed by the defense counsel for defendant 2 conducting cross-examination. Finally, the prosecution has the opportunity to conduct re-examination.

Question 4

Where a non-expert witness is deemed to be 'hostile', which of the following types of question may counsel ask in examination-in-chief? A non- expert may not give opinion evidence. All other questions are permissible but leading questions may only be asked after the judge has consented that the witness be deemed hostile.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Where a non-expert witness is deemed to...

Question 5

Which of the following is NOT an exception to the rule that, in general, previous consistent statements are inadmissible? Section 120(3)-(7) C.J.A. 2003 governs the admissibility of previous consistent statements. There are also a few common law exceptions, of which a res gestae previous consistent statement is one.

Accepted Answer

Police interviews are not an exception to the rule that, in general, previous consistent statements are inadmissible. However, Section 120(3)-(7) C.J.A. 2003 governs the admissibility of previous consistent statements, and there are also common law exceptions such as a previous consistent statement that was res gestae. Rebutting allegations of fabrication, a witness refreshing their memory from a document, and previous statements identifying a person, object, or place are all exceptions to the rule.

Question 6

In examination-in-chief, which of these types of question is permitted? Leading on matters agreed with the other side as well as if a witness is hostile are the two main exceptions to the rule that only non-leading questions may be asked in examination-in-chief.

Accepted Answer

The question specifically mentions two exceptions to the rule against leading questions in examination-in-chief: leading questions on a matter agreed between the parties and leading questions if the witness is deemed hostile. Therefore, the correct answer is B. A is incorrect because leading questions in general are not permitted in examination-in-chief. C is incorrect because putting suggestions to the witness and asking "that's right, isn't it?" is a form of leading question. D is close, but it does not include the exception for when the witness is deemed hostile.

Question 7

Which of the following is a leading question? The other answers are all open-ended whereas a leading question will always suggest an answer to the witness.

Accepted Answer

The question "You hit him, didn't you?" suggests to the witness that they did indeed hit the person in question, leading them to agree with the statement rather than providing their own unbiased version of events.

Question 8

If a side fails to cross-examine a witness, they are deemed to accept the other side's version of events. Therefore in all but the rarest of occasions, a side will cross-examine their opposition's witness(es)

Accepted Answer

If a side fails to cross-examine a witness, it can be construed as accepting the other side's version of events, so it is generally advisable to cross-examine one's opposition's witness(es) in most situations.

Question 9

If the main purpose of adducing a complainant's sexual history is to impugn their credibility, a court should not admit the evidence or allow cross-examination upon it. Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, s.41 prohibits such evidence as it does not relate to a relevant issue in the case.

Accepted Answer

The statement correctly reflects the provisions of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, which prohibit the admissibility of a complainant's sexual history if the sole purpose is to impugn their credibility. Such evidence is deemed irrelevant to the case and therefore inadmissible.

Question 10

A defendant's belief that the complainant was consenting falls under an 'issue of consent' for determining whether evidence of the complainant's sexual history can be admitted. Under s.42(1)(b) of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (on the interpretation of s.41), 'issue of consent' means any issue surrounding whether the complainant in fact consented to the conduct constituting the offence with which the accused is charged (and accordingly does NOT include any issue as to the bel

Accepted Answer

The definition of 'issue of consent' under s.42(1)(b) of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 does include issues related to the defendant's belief in the complainant's consent. This means that if the defendant's belief in consent is genuinely held and relevant to the charges, it can be considered under the umbrella of 'issue of consent,' contrary to the implication that it does not.

Question 11

If a side fails to cross-examine a witness, they are deemed to accept the other side's version of events. Therefore in all but the rarest of occasions, a side will cross-examine their opposition's witness(es)

Accepted Answer

This is known as the "failure to cross-examine rule" and is a common principle in the legal system. If a side fails to cross-examine a witness, it is assumed that they do not contest or dispute the witness's testimony. Therefore, it is important for both sides to cross-examine each other's witnesses in order to challenge their credibility and present their own version of events.

Question 12

A document used by a witness to refresh their memory is then always entered into evidence. Section 120 of the C.J.A. 2003 holds that it is NOT evidence unless the witness is cross-examined on the contents of the statement and consequently, those contents are received in evidence.

Accepted Answer

The statement used by a witness to refresh their memory is not automatically entered into evidence. It is only considered evidence if the witness is cross-examined on the contents of the statement and those contents are received in evidence according to Section 120 of the C.J.A. 2003.

Question 13

A party must always re-examine their witness. A party has a discretion as to the conduct of all questioning. They don't even have to examine-in-chief.

Accepted Answer

While a party has discretion in how they conduct questioning, including whether to conduct an examination-in-chief, re-examination is not always mandatory. It is typically used to clarify points brought up during cross-examination and is at the discretion of the party calling the witness.

Question 14

Which of the following are exceptions to the rule that a complainant's sexual history cannot be entered into evidence or cross-examined upon? Section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 sets out the exceptions where a court may give leave for evidence of a complainant's sexual history to be admitted or for them to be cross-examined upon it.

Accepted Answer

The answer of Which of the following are exceptions to...

Quiz 5: Witnesses III: Examination and Cross-Examination

Counsel can ask witnesses absolutely anything. The questions must not be, ""merely scandalous or intended or calculated only to vilify, insult or annoy...a witness"" as a rule of common law and under the Bar Code of Conduct.

Which of the following are conditions for allowing a witness to refresh their memory whilst giving evidence? Section 139 of the C.J.A. 2003 governs the refreshing of witnesses' memories from documents. It states that it is generally permitted, subject to the two provisos.

What is the correct order of questioning of a prosecution witness in a trial with 2 defendants?

In examination-in-chief, which of these types of question is permitted? Leading on matters agreed with the other side as well as if a witness is hostile are the two main exceptions to the rule that only non-leading questions may be asked in examination-in-chief.

Which of the following is a leading question? The other answers are all open-ended whereas a leading question will always suggest an answer to the witness.

If a side fails to cross-examine a witness, they are deemed to accept the other side's version of events. Therefore in all but the rarest of occasions, a side will cross-examine their opposition's witness(es)

If the main purpose of adducing a complainant's sexual history is to impugn their credibility, a court should not admit the evidence or allow cross-examination upon it. Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, s.41 prohibits such evidence as it does not relate to a relevant issue in the case.

If a side fails to cross-examine a witness, they are deemed to accept the other side's version of events. Therefore in all but the rarest of occasions, a side will cross-examine their opposition's witness(es)

A document used by a witness to refresh their memory is then always entered into evidence. Section 120 of the C.J.A. 2003 holds that it is NOT evidence unless the witness is cross-examined on the contents of the statement and consequently, those contents are received in evidence.

A party must always re-examine their witness. A party has a discretion as to the conduct of all questioning. They don't even have to examine-in-chief.