Introduction

BOB & Ors v R [2024] EWCA Crim 1494 is a pivotal case adjudicated by the England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) on December 5, 2024. The prosecution appealed against a judge's ruling that deemed a series of hearsay witness statements inadmissible, primarily because both witnesses had deceased prior to the trial. This case delves into the complexities surrounding the admissibility of hearsay evidence, particularly focusing on the interpretation and application of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and established precedents such as R v Horncastle and R v Riat.

Summary of the Judgment

The Court of Appeal reviewed the prosecution's appeal against the trial judge's exclusion of hearsay statements from two deceased witnesses. The appellate court scrutinized the application of the six-step framework from R v Riat, identifying flaws in the trial judge's reasoning, particularly his failure to adequately consider the reliability and assessability of the hearsay statements in light of supporting evidence. The appellate court ultimately ruled that the trial judge erred in excluding the hearsay evidence, thereby allowing the prosecution's appeal and rendering the hearsay statements admissible.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment heavily references two cornerstone cases:

• R v Horncastle [2009] UKSC 14: This case established the modern framework for the admissibility of hearsay evidence in criminal proceedings, emphasizing the necessity of reliability and the jury's role in assessing such evidence.
• R v Riat [2012] EWCA Crim 1509: Building upon Horncastle, Riat provided a six-step approach to evaluating hearsay evidence, offering practical guidance for courts in assessing both the reliability of hearsay statements and the mechanisms available for their testing and assessment.

In BOB & Ors v R, the appellate court identified that while the trial judge relied on the Riat framework, his application was flawed. The appellate court suggested a reformulation of the six steps in Riat to incorporate a more thorough consideration of evidence that could test and assess the reliability of hearsay statements, particularly emphasizing the importance of disclosure under section 124 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.

Legal Reasoning

The core of the appellate court's reasoning centered on the proper application of the Riat six-step framework. The trial judge had deemed the hearsay statements unreliable without sufficiently considering the supporting evidence, such as mobile phone video recordings and the consistency of certain facts undisputed by the defense. The appellate court criticized the trial judge for not fully engaging with initial witness statements and failing to require the prosecution to disclose critical materials that could have aided in assessing the hearsay's reliability.

The appellate court also addressed procedural shortcomings, notably the prosecution's inadequate disclosure of material under section 124. By reformulating the Riat steps into a seven-step process, the appellate court underscored the necessity of thorough disclosure to facilitate a robust assessment of hearsay evidence's reliability.

Impact

This judgment has significant implications for the admissibility of hearsay evidence in criminal cases within England and Wales. By acknowledging flaws in the existing Riat framework and proposing refinements, the appellate court sets a precedent for more rigorous scrutiny of hearsay evidence, especially concerning disclosure obligations. Future cases will likely follow this enhanced framework, ensuring that hearsay statements are both reliable and adequately testable by the jury, thereby upholding the integrity of the judicial process.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Hearsay Evidence

Hearsay evidence refers to statements made outside of court that are presented to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Generally, hearsay is inadmissible due to concerns about its reliability. However, exceptions exist, especially when the evidence is deemed reliable or its reliability can be properly tested.

Section 124 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003

This section allows for the admission of hearsay evidence related to the credibility of the witness who made the statement. It enables the court to admit additional evidence that could undermine the reliability of the hearsay statement, such as prior inconsistent statements or independent supporting evidence.

Riat Framework

Established in R v Riat, the six-step framework provides a structured approach for courts to evaluate the admissibility of hearsay evidence. It assesses statutory justifications, the ability to test the hearsay's reliability, interests of justice, and whether the evidence should be excluded despite being admissible.

Conclusion

BOB & Ors v R marks a significant development in the adjudication of hearsay evidence within the English legal system. By critically evaluating and refining the existing frameworks for hearsay admissibility, the Court of Appeal has ensured a more nuanced and comprehensive approach to assessing such evidence. This judgment emphasizes the paramount importance of reliability, thorough disclosure, and the jury's capacity to test and assess hearsay statements. Legal practitioners must now adhere to the refined seven-step framework proposed by the appellate court, ensuring that hearsay evidence is meticulously scrutinized and justly admitted, thereby reinforcing the fairness and accuracy of criminal proceedings.