Principles of evidence in criminal cases / Elisabeth McDonald.

"Thomson Reuters.".

"The text is designed to complement the Thomson Reuters publications The Evidence Act 2006: act and analysis (2nd edition) and the commentary in Adams on Criminal Law"--Back cover.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

Principles of Evidence in Criminal Cases -- Foreword -- Foreword -- Preface -- Preface -- Contents -- -- 1. Principles, purposes and proof -- Principles, Purposes and Proof -- 1.1. Introduction -- 1.2. Principles of the rules of evidence in criminal proceedings -- 1.2.1. The reform project â#x80;#x93; s 6 -- 1.2.2. Admissibility decisions -- (1) Rule or discretion? -- (2) Admission by consent -- (3) The politics of admission -- 1.2.3. The role of the jury -- 1.3. Scope of the Evidence Act 2006 -- 1.3.1. Application of the Act -- (1) Proceeding -- 1.3.2. The continued role of the common law â#x80;#x93; ss 10 and 12 --1.4 Types of evidence -- 1.4.1. Direct and circumstantial evidence -- (1) Evidence of collateral matters -- 1.4.2. Real evidence -- (1) Views -- 1.4.3. Testimonial evidence -- 1.4.4. Judicial notice -- 1.5. Burden and standard of proof -- 1.5.1. Burden of proof -- (1) Presumptions -- 1.5.2. Standard of proof -- (1) Beyond reasonable doubt -- (2) Balance of probabilities -- 1.6. Matters of proof, weight and fact-finding -- 1.6.1. Weight -- (1) Corroboration -- 1.7. Warnings and directions -- 1.7.1. Using the evidence --1.7.2 Assessing the weight of the evidence -- 1.8. Summary -- -- 2. The fundamentals of admissibility: purpose, relevance and probative value -- The fundamentals of admissibility: purpose, relevance and probative value -- 2.1. Introduction -- 2.2. Relevance and purpose -- 2.2.1. How knowing purpose assists identification of specific admissibility rules -- 2.2.2. A definition of relevance -- (1) â#x80;#x9C;Mere â#x80;#x9D; or â#x80;#x9C;logical â#x80;#x9D; relevance and the inquiry into â#x80;#x9C;sufficient relevance â#x80;#x9D; -- 2.2.3. The role of logic, experience and knowledge: syllogistic reasoning --(1) Whose experience? Ways of addressing consistency in admissibility decisions -- 2.3. Probative value versus prejudicial effect -- 2.3.1. The inquiry into probative value -- 2.3.2. Identifying illegitimate prejudice -- 2.3.3. Needless prolonging of the proceedings -- 2.3.4. Fairness to the defendant -- 2.3.5. Is a meaningful balancing possible? -- 2.3.6. Reference to s 8 after considering a specific admissibility rule: some examples -- (1) Propensity evidence about a defendant in a criminal proceeding -- (2) Hearsay evidence --(3) Evidence of veracity -- (4) Propensity evidence about a complainant in a sexual case -- 2.4. The role of warnings -- 2.5. The weight of the evidence -- 2.6. Summary -- -- 3. Witness questioning rules -- Witness Questioning Rules -- 3.1. Introduction -- 3.2. Who may give evidence? -- 3.2.1. Eligibility not competence -- (1) Judges, jurors and counsel -- 3.2.2. Compellability -- (1) Defendants in criminal proceedings -- (2) Spouses, judges, bank officers and Heads of State -- 3.2.3. Testimonial privileges -- (1) The codified privileges -- (2) Confidential information: discretionary exemption from disclosure.

Also available online.

Machine converted from AACR2 source record.