Chapter 8 Multiple Choice Questions

. What is the trial judge's role when a witness refuses to be cross-examined by a particular advocate?

The judge will not normally take over the cross-examination of the witness. However, the judge may do so where the witness is vulnerable (e.g. young or a traumatized complainant in relation to an alleged sexual offence), but will normally be restricted to asking questions prepared by the cross-examiner.

The judge will not normally take over the cross-examination of the witness. However, the judge may do so where the witness is vulnerable (e.g. young or a traumatized complainant in relation to an alleged sexual offence) and may ask any question that he or she considers relevant.

The judge is normally obliged to take over the cross-examination and is entitled to ask the witness any question that he or she considers relevant.

Where a witness who has been examined in-chief declines to be cross-examined, the judge will not cross-examine the witness and will usually rule that the witness's evidence in-chief inadmissible.

. What are the consequences (if any) of a party's failure to cross-examine in a trial? Please select all that apply.

Where a party omits to cross-examine a witness about a relevant issue in a criminal trial, the judge is obliged to direct the jury that it is entitled to draw certain adverse inferences from the omission.

Failure to cross-examine a witness who has given relevant evidence for the other side is held technically to amount to an acceptance of the witness's evidence in chief.

There is authority that, in a criminal trial, the duty to put one's case to the witness in cross-examination is part of the duty to assist the court in identifying the issues in the case.

Failure to cross-examine a witness who has given relevant evidence for the other side is final and the judge has no discretion to recall the witness in either a criminal or a civil trial. In civil proceedings a party's remedy is to bring a claim in professional negligence.

. A man is charged with offences of rape and theft. Both offences arise from the same set of circumstances. He has dismissed his lawyers and wants to cross-examine the complainant in person. That is, rather than instructing a lawyer, he wants to cross-examine the complainant himself. May he do this?

The defendant has the right to cross-examine in person any witnesses (including the complainant) as part of his right to a fair trial, by virtue of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The defendant has the right to cross-examine the complainant in person provided he does not use cross-examination to take the opportunity to abuse the witness. Judges are provided with clear instructions in the Crown Court Bench Book regarding the regulation of such cross-examination which, it is stated, must be adhered to strictly.

The defendant may not cross-examine the complainant in person in respect of either offence. The Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 prohibits cross-examination by the defendant where the defendant is charged with both a sexual offence and a non-sexual offence.

The defendant may cross-examine the complainant in person in relation to the theft offence but not in relation to any sexual offence, such as rape. The Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 prohibits cross-examination in these limited circumstances.

. A defendant's confession is excluded from evidence on the grounds that the police obtained it unfairly. However, the defendant later contradicts her confession when she gives evidence and the co-defendant wishes to put the earlier confession to her and cross-examine her about it. To what extent is this permissible?

In cross-examination, the co-defendant is only entitled to ask the defendant about her previous statement in which she confessed and is obliged to accept her answer as final.

The long-established common law rule applies in these circumstances. There is no licence to elicit evidence which is inadmissible merely because it arises in the course of cross-examination.

The co-defendant is not entitled to cross-examine the defendant about her confession. Once a confession is excluded from evidence under ss. 76 or 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 it is excluded for all purposes and cannot be the subject of cross-examination by the Crown or by a co-accused.

The co-defendant is entitled, in cross-examination, to ask the defendant about her previous statement in which she confessed. She is also permitted to put the previous statement to her in order to contradict her.

. Alice witnessed a serious assault and made a statement to the police at the time. At trial she is called as a prosecution witness, but gives a different account of what happened. The defence advocate wishes to cross-examine Alice about her previous statement to the police, which contradicts her evidence at trial. Is the advocate obliged to do anything in order to do so?

If the advocate intends contradicting her, Alice should be shown any statements in the document that are claimed to be contradictory.

If the advocate intends contradicting her, he may do so. However, before doing so, 'the circumstances, sufficient to designate the particular occasion must be mentioned to the witness'.

If the advocate intends contradicting her, Alice should be warned that it is a criminal offence to make a previous inconsistent statement.

If the advocate intends contradicting her, Alice should be shown any statements in the document that are claimed to be contradictory. If Alice alters her evidence the judge will be obliged to exclude her evidence, as it will be designated as 'self-serving'.

. A complainant is cross-examined to the effect that she has previously made false complaints of rape in respect of other men. Her answers will be final because the questions relate to the credibility of the complainant and, therefore, are collateral in nature. likelinant is cross-examined to the effect that she has previously made false complaints of

True

False

. Is expert evidence admissible to show that a witness is incapable of providing reliable evidence?

Yes, this evidence is admissible generally to assist the jury make a fair assessment of any witness.

Yes, if the witness suffers from some disease, defect or abnormality of mind.

No, unless the witness has been medically examined by the expert witness.

No, as that would clearly 'usurp the function of the jury' in coming to an opinion on all the evidence.

. 'One of the effects of the increased admission of hearsay statements in civil proceedings is that evidence that would have been admissible in court to undermine the witness's credibility, had the witness given oral evidence, is inadmissible because the witness is absent'.likelinant is cross-examined to the effect that she has previously made false complaints of

True

False

. What is the purpose of re-examination? Please select all that apply.

Re-examination is, quite simply, another opportunity for a party to question their witness if issues have been overlooked, inadvertently or otherwise, in the earlier examination. Leading questions are normally permitted, but the judge has a discretion to prevent them in certain circumstances.

Re-examination is the process whereby a witness is recalled to be cross-examined again. This may arise because an advocate has omitted, by inadvertence, to put some part of the party's case to the witness. The advocate has a duty, at the first available opportunity, to mention that fact to the judge and apply for 're-examination' of the witness on the relevant issue/s.

In re-examination, a witness is entitled to explain any apparent contradiction or ambiguity in his evidence or damage to his credit arising from cross-examination. This may involve reference to facts which have not previously been given in evidence, if they are properly relevant in order to deal with the points put in cross-examination.

Re-examination is the process whereby a party calling a witness may seek to explain or clarify any points that arose in cross-examination and which appear to be unfavourable to that party's case.

. Leading questions are not permitted in examination in chief but are in both cross-examination and re-examination of witnesses.likelinant is cross-examined to the effect that she has previously made false complaints of

True

False

Quiz Content