LLW4007 - Tramp's Defence Case Study - Evidence Law - Law Assignment Help

Assignment Task

Issue –
The issue here is Tramp has been charged with incitement to commit the prescribed offences and now the prosecution must provide evidence with regards to legislation and evidence rule in order to undermine Tramp's defence and Kayli as a witness for the defence.

Rule and Application –
In the current circumstances since Kayli has already given a press statement about the meetings and is abiding by it, the onus is on the prosecution to gather all evidence, witnesses and relevant law to prove the facts. In the proceedings of cross-examining Kayli as a witness by the prosecutor, the prosecutor can use s 43(1) of the Evidence Act 2008 Victoria (EAV) to surprise and bring in the matter of the inconsistent statement Kaylie gave to her colleague Lizzie with different facts attaining to the meeting. This can start raising doubts and damaging the credibility of Kayli as a witness for the defence. However, since Lizzie provided this statement to the Police a day before the trial there is a possibility the defence can object to it for not bringing it to their notice before the trial. If Kayli does not admit to making the prior inconsistent statement, the prosecutor using the power of s 43(2) of the EAV must provide Kayli with the relevant information in identifying the inconsistencies.
In the case of JCS v The Queen [2006] NSWCCA 221, a letter containing the prior inconsistent statement was inadmissible because the counsel had not informed the witness of its provenance.
Therefore, it is very important that the prosecution works with Kayli into providing all information that can assist in proving her inconsistencies and damaging her credibility.
Credibility evidence is defined under s 101A of the Act in relation to a witness is the evidence relevant to the witness or person is relevant because it affects the assessment of the credibility of the witness. With the usage of exceptions under the credibility evidence rule s 102 Kayli’s credibility can be challenged and damaged by the prosecution with the power of relevant sections as per the exceptions that are s 103, s 104, s 106, s 108 and s 110.

Conclusion –
In conclusion, there is a good chance that the prosecutor can use the aid of s 43 and the relevant sections under the exceptions of the credibility rule s 102 of the Act since there is a significant relationship between these provisions in tarnishing Kayli’s credibility and proving her inconsistencies in prior statements for being biased and untruthful.

This LLW4007 - Law Assignment has been solved by our Law experts at My Uni Paper. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our Experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.
Be it a used or new solution, the quality of the work submitted by our assignment experts remains unhampered. You may continue to expect the same or even better quality with the used and new assignment solution files respectively. There’s one thing to be noticed that you could choose one between the two and acquire an HD either way. You could choose a new assignment solution file to get yourself an exclusive, plagiarism (with free Turnitin file), expert quality assignment or order an old solution file that was considered worthy of the highest distinction.