In R v Horncastle the Supreme Court held that the admission of [...]under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 contained sufficient safeguards so that convictions based solely, or to a decisive extent, on such statements would not breach the Convention. In the instant case no breach of the ECHR, art 6 was found.
Answer
hearsay evidence
Tags
#freedom-of-person #human-rights #public
Question
In R v Horncastle the Supreme Court held that the admission of [...]under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 contained sufficient safeguards so that convictions based solely, or to a decisive extent, on such statements would not breach the Convention. In the instant case no breach of the ECHR, art 6 was found.
Answer
?
Tags
#freedom-of-person #human-rights #public
Question
In R v Horncastle the Supreme Court held that the admission of [...]under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 contained sufficient safeguards so that convictions based solely, or to a decisive extent, on such statements would not breach the Convention. In the instant case no breach of the ECHR, art 6 was found.
Answer
hearsay evidence
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it In R v Horncastle the Supreme Court held that the admission of hearsay evidence under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 contained sufficient safeguards so that convictions based solely, or to a decisive extent, on such statements would not breach the Convention. In the
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.