In [case], the appellants argued before the Supreme Court that they had not received a fair trial when their convictions were based solely, or to a decisive extent, on the hearsay statements of witnesses who they had not had a chance to cross-examine.
Answer
R v Horncastle [2009] UKSC 14
Tags
#freedom-of-person #human-rights #public
Question
In [case], the appellants argued before the Supreme Court that they had not received a fair trial when their convictions were based solely, or to a decisive extent, on the hearsay statements of witnesses who they had not had a chance to cross-examine.
Answer
?
Tags
#freedom-of-person #human-rights #public
Question
In [case], the appellants argued before the Supreme Court that they had not received a fair trial when their convictions were based solely, or to a decisive extent, on the hearsay statements of witnesses who they had not had a chance to cross-examine.
Answer
R v Horncastle [2009] UKSC 14
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 [2009] UKSC 14, the appellants argued before the Supreme Court that they had not received a fair trial when their convictions were based solely, or to a decisive extent, on the hearsay statements of w
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.