Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

HELP ME- Law of Evidence

Dale is charged with GBH against his ex-girlfriend, Valerie whom he dated for 2 years, and he pleads not guilty.Valerie says that on the night of 10 October 2014 at around 8pm, Dale knocked on her door and confronted her about the fact that she had started a relationship with another man.

She says that an argument ensued, and he grabbed her by the throat and threatened her with a knife, and then hit her in the stomach. At this time of night the street where Valerie lives is usually very quiet.

Walter, Valerie’s neighbour, was out walking his dog (Fido) at about 8.30 pm that night. He was just re-entering the street and was about 100 metres away from his own (and Valerie’s) house when heard raised voices coming from the general direction of Valerie’s house. He stopped to observe the events for a moment but he could not make out what was being said. Walter continued his walk to his house, and while untangling Fido who had got his lead wrapped around a lamppost, Walter says that a very tall man (well over 6 foot) ran past him, presumably running from Valerie’s house. Walter described him as being bald with a grey beard, and that one of his arms was covered in tattoos. This description matches Dale’s appearance. The police held a video identification procedure. Nine men took part in this, but only 3 of whom were over 6 foot, and five had no beard. Walter picked out Dale from the procedure.

The prosecution wishes to adduce the evidence of Mary, another of Dale’s ex-girlfriends. Mary had a relationship with Dale that ended five years ago. The prosecution wishes Mary to testify to the fact that after she had ended the relationship and started seeing another man, she met Dale on the street one evening where he accosted her – that he grabbed her arm roughly, pushed her against a wall, and screamed abuse in her face. After that incident Mary says that Dale then told some of her friends that she had previously been a prostitute (which was untrue).Dale claims that he was not near Valerie’s house on the night of the offence, but that he was at the gym. There is no record, however, of Dale signing in at the gym on 10 October 2014 as members are required to do.

Discuss the evidential issues arising on these facts.

What do you guys think?

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 1

Fabrique

There is a mitigating factor of Dale saying he was at the gym when there was no record of him signing in. Why is there a false alibi? Was he really at Valerie's house or was he somewhere else?

Having Walter witness someone run past him and give a description is great. But the line up should have all been men over 6 foot with beards. instead of the chances of it being Dale being 1/9, it was actually 1/3 (the ones over 6 foot).

Forensic evidence to consider is fibre transfer between Dale and Valerie if there was an altercation. What were each of them wearing? Also, were any injuries on Valerie documented by the police, is there bruising on her neck which could be linked to an assault?

The calling of Mary would be considered historical and may be classed as hearsay. Was Mary's case reported at the time? Did it go to court? Does Dale have any previous convictions?

Hope this helps.