Can dangers, fears & concerns that underlie the rule against hearsay be assuaged without excluding relevant and highly cogent evidence?
The Rule against hearsay Hearsay may mean previous statement made by witness who is testifying or the rule that statement made by person other than the witness who can adduce direct evidence Assertions other than one made by a person while giving oral evidence in proceedings and tendered as evidence of facts asserted is inadmissible. The rule is highly complex and technically difficult to describe with accuracy and it has unclear scope with numerous exceptions and indeed Lord Reid rightly observed in Myers V. DPP that the law regarding hearsay is technical… absurdly technical .The…show more content… There are Exceptions to this rule but no matter how cogent particular evidence may seem to be, unless they fall within a class which is admissible, it is excluded. The exceptions had been developed to mitigate the exclusionary character of hearsay but this is done very carefully guided by certain rules taking into consideration the fears and dangers of its admissibility without leaving out what is cogent evidence. Statements made in public documents are prima facie admissible as evidence of truth of their content .S.77 & 79 of Evidence Act .The justification for this exception is reliability and convenience as in many instances the official may be dead or might have been transferred. To factor in the dangers and fears of admitting it Lord Reid says that the documents to be public records must be subject to public inspection. For it to be admissible it should concern the public, made by officer acting under duty to inquire and record the inquiry, and is intended to be retained for public reference and Inspection. This is equally reflected in S. 80 of the Act with additional requirement that the said document should be certified…show more content… It includes statement by conduct or words testifying what was the cause of his death , it is must made when the accused is at the point of death for it to be admissible. The rationale for this exception is found in the celebrated Dictum by CB Eyre that they are declarations made in extremity, when the party is at the point of death, and when every hope of this world is gone: when every motive to falsehood is silenced, and the mind is induced by the most powerful considerations to speak the truth; the situation so solemn and so awful, is considered by the law as creating an obligation equal to that which is imposed by a positive oath administered in a court of justice. To minimize admitting evidence that may be fabricated the test is whether all hope of life was abandoned so that the deceased thought that the death was eminent. This is covered in 33 (a) of the Act. The facts must be given as stated and not opinion as to what the declarant might have