Introduction

The rule against hearsay is quite possibly the most misunderstood rule in evidence law. It is, perhaps, one of the most common popularly-misunderstood rules in all law. However, a thorough understanding of this rule is absolutely vital for a working knowledge of evidence.

The rule, in its most basic form, is easy enough to understand. We already know that, in oral evidence, a witness can only give evidence of things which they perceived with their own fives senses. It seems to follow, as a simple matter of logic, that witnesses cannot give evidence of things someone else perceived with their five senses, and then told the witness about. In that case, the best thing to do is surely to bring that other person before the court, to get the evidence directly from them.

Confusion arises because, in a quite a range of circumstances, hearsay evidence can be admitted. Understanding and applying the rule against hearsay is actually more a matter of understanding and applying these exceptions.

Reading:

Field Textbook, Chapter 9 (Required) NB: In the study guide below, I have indicated when you should read this Chapter.

Objectives

At the end of this week, you should be able to:

• explain the rule against hearsay and its rationale;
• identify statements as hearsay and distinguish them from statements of direct evidence;
• distinguish between statements called upon as evidence of the truth of the statement, and other statements;
• distinguish between first-hand and remote hearsay, and identify the legal implications of this distinction;
• outline the exceptions to the hearsay rule in general terms; and
• outline the ways in which prior statements may be used as evidence relating to the credit of a witness.

Summary

[This is a YouTube video]

Tutorial

[This is a YouTube video to be inserted once the tutorial is held]

Version

This unit was last updated on 28.10.2019