Amendments proposed to the Criminal Justice Bill, As Amended - continued	House of Commons
back to previous text

   

Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke

156

Page     65,     line     44     [Clause     106],     leave out from 'deceased)"' to end of line 44 and insert 'only a statement by a person to whom the original statement was made is capable of admission in criminal proceedings as evidence of a matter stated in the original statement (so that a statement by B, but not A, may be admitted as evidence of the fact that C shot the deceased).'.

---

   

Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke

157

Page     66,     line     1     [Clause     106],     after 'statement', insert 'not made in oral evidence in the proceedings'.

   

Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke

158

Page     66,     line     7     [Clause     106],     leave out subsection (3).

   

Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke

159

Page     66,     line     15     [Clause     107],     leave out '104 or'.

   

Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke

160

Page     66,     line     23     [Clause     108],     leave out ', 104'.

---

   

Mr Oliver Letwin
Mr Dominic Grieve
Mr Nick Hawkins
Mr Mark Francois

63

Page     67,     line     29     [Clause     110],     leave out from 'time' to 'that'.

   

Mr Oliver Letwin
Mr Dominic Grieve
Mr Nick Hawkins
Mr Mark Francois

64

Page     67,     line     36     [Clause     110],     at end insert—

    '(1A)   No direction by the court to a jury to acquit a defendant should be made unless the prosecution case has been closed or the case against the defendant is based wholly on a statement not made in oral evidence in the proceedings.'.

---

   

Mr Oliver Letwin
Mr Dominic Grieve
Mr Nick Hawkins
Mr Mark Francois

65

Page     68,     line     4     [Clause     110],     leave out from beginning to 'that'.

   

Mr Oliver Letwin
Mr Dominic Grieve
Mr Nick Hawkins
Mr Mark Francois

66

Page     68,     line     12     [Clause     110],     at end insert—

    '(3A)   No direction by the court to a jury to acquit a defendant should be made unless the prosecution case has been closed or the case against the defendant is based wholly on a statement not made in oral evidence in the proceedings.'.

   

Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke

161

Page     68,     line     23     [Clause     111],     at end insert '(and, where the statement is tendered by the defence, of the impact of its exclusion on the fairness of the trial)'.

---

   

Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke

162

Page     71,     line     6     [Clause     116],     leave out from 'unavailable)' to end of line 10.

---

   

Mr Secretary Blunkett

97

Page     72,     line     33     [Clause     119],     leave out 'a defect of speech or hearing' and insert 'any disability, disorder or other impairment'.

   

Mr Secretary Blunkett

98

Page     72,     line     34     [Clause     119],     after 'signs', insert 'or by way of any device'.

---

   

Mr Secretary Blunkett

139

Page     193,     line     2     [Schedule     6],     at end insert—

'(3A)

In section 108(4) for paragraph (a) substitute—

"(a)	in the case of proceedings before a court-martial, proceedings held for the determination of the issue must take place before the judge advocate in the absence of the other members of the court;".'.

---

   

Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke

163

Page     194,     line     17     [Schedule     6],     leave out from 'unavailable)' to end of line 21.

   

Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke

164

Page     194,     line     29     [Schedule     6],     leave out from 'unavailable)' to end of line 33.

   

Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke

165

Page     194,     line     41     [Schedule     6],     leave out from 'unavailable)' to end of line 45.

---

   

Mr Secretary Blunkett

99

Page     75,     line     28     [Clause     125],     leave out 'a defect of speech or hearing' and insert 'any disability, disorder or other impairment'.

   

Mr Secretary Blunkett

100

Page     75,     line     29     [Clause     125],     after 'signs', insert 'or by way of any device'.

---

   

Mr Charles Kennedy
Mr Menzies Campbell
Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke
Mr Andrew Stunell

29

Page     54,     line     11,     leave out Clause 85.

   

Mr Charles Kennedy
Mr Menzies Campbell
Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke
Mr Andrew Stunell

30

Page     54,     line     13     [Clause 85],     leave out 'admissible, if, but only if' and insert 'not admissible, unless'.

   

Mr David Kidney
Mr Hilton Dawson

33

Page     54     [Clause 85],     leave out lines 15 to 27 and insert 'or

(b)	it has substantial probative value in relation to an important matter in issue between the defendant and a co-defendant.

    (1A)   In criminal proceedings evidence of the defendant's bad character is admissible with leave of the court if it is relevant to a matter in issue in the proceedings and—

(a)	the evidence is adduced by the defendant himself or is given in answer to a question asked by him in cross-examination and intended to elicit it,

(b)	it is important explanatory evidence,

(c)	it is evidence of the defendant's conviction for an offence of the same description or of the same category, as the one with which he is charged,

(d)	it is relevant to an important matter in issue between the defendant and the prosecution,

(e)	it is evidence to correct a false impression given by the defendant, or

(f)	the defendant has made an attack on another person's character.

   

Simon Hughes
Mr David Heath
Annette Brooke

168

Page     54,     line     19     [Clause     85],     leave out paragraphs (d), (e) and (f).

   

Vera Baird
Chris Mullin
Tony Wright
Mr Robert Marshall-Andrews
Mr Neil Gerrard
Mr Mark Fisher

Mr Austin Mitchell

133

Page     54,     line     19     [Clause     85],     leave out paragraph (d).

   

Mrs Claire Curtis-Thomas

115

Page     54,     line     27     [Clause     85],     at end insert—

    '(1A)   In a case of serious historical complex abuse, evidence of bad character may only be admitted if, in addition to the requirements of this Part, its submission to the court has the consent of the Attorney General.'.

   

Mr David Kidney
Mr Hilton Dawson

34

Page     54,     line     28     [Clause 85],     leave out 'subsection (1)' and insert 'subsections (1) and (1A)'.

   

Mr David Kidney
Mr Hilton Dawson

35

Page     54,     line     29     [Clause 85],     leave out '(1)(d), (e) or (h)' and insert '(1A)(c), (d) or (f)'.

   

Mr Chris Mullin

126

Page     54,     line     29     [Clause     85],     leave out '(d), (e) or (h)' and insert '(c), (d), (e), (f) or (h)'.

   

Mr Oliver Letwin
Mr Dominic Grieve
Mr Nick Hawkins
Mr Mark Francois

23

Page     54,     line     30     [Clause     85],     leave out from third 'the' to 'that' in line 32 and insert 'potential probative value of such evidence is so outweighed by its prejudicial effect'.

   

Mr Oliver Letwin
Mr Dominic Grieve
Mr Nick Hawkins
Mr Mark Francois

24

Page     54,     line     33     [Clause     85],     leave out subsection (4) and insert—

    '(4)   In considering the probative value of such evidence the court is to have regard, in particular, to

(a)	the extent (if any) to which the evidence tends to suggest that the defendant has a propensity to act in the specific manner alleged;

(b)	any similarities between the facts revealed by the evidence and those now alleged;

(c)	the extent to which any similarities may be attributed to coincidence;

(d)	any dissimilarities between the facts revealed by the evidence and those now alleged, and

(e)	the passage of time between the matters to which the evidence relates and the matters now alleged.

    (4A)   In considering the prejudicial effect of such evidence the court is to have regard, in particular, to

(a)	the risk of the tribunal of fact attaching undue significance to the evidence in question in determining the defendant's guilt;

(b)	the risk of the tribunal of fact convicting the defendant on the basis of his previous conduct rather than because they are satisfied of his guilt in relation to the matters now alleged;

(c)	any disproportion between the gravity of the conduct revealed by the evidence and the gravity of the matters now alleged; and

(d)	the risk that such evidence will confuse or distract the tribunal of fact.'.

   

Mr Secretary Blunkett

134A

Page     54,     line     37     [Clause     85],     leave out subsection (5).

   

Mrs Claire Curtis-Thomas

116

Page     54,     line     38     [Clause     85],     at end insert—

    '(6)   Evidence of the defendant's bad character shall not be admissible in a case that would otherwise be based mainly or entirely on corroboration by volume.'.

Prepared 2 Apr 2003