Noticeboard

Witnesses—Canada

Alberta Law Reform Institute, Competence and Communication in the Alberta Evidence Act, Final Report 111, January 2018, available at <https://www.alri.ualberta.ca/images/stories/docs/FR111.pdf>

This report from Alberta’s peak law reform body recommends changes to witness competency rules similar to reforms in other Canadian jurisdictions. Recommendations include: abolishing mandatory competency hearings for child witnesses; permitting courts to direct children under 14 to make an affirmation rather than an oath; abolishing the corroboration requirement for unsworn child evidence; and permitting witnesses to communicate via their preferred form of communication (with no impact on tests for competence.)

Jurors—United Kingdom

Scottish Courts and Tribunal Service, Enabling Jury Service, Report, February 2018, available at <http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/about-the-scottish-court-service/reports-data/enabling-jury-service/>

This report from Scotland’s court administration service responds to an incident where a blind juror was initially compelled to participate in a jury panel and then excluded. The report makes a series of recommendations that do not require legislative changes (including encouraging panellists to identify a disability and installing electronic assistance) and two that do (permitting interpreters to attend in the jury room; and empowering the judge to determine whether a juror with a disability can or cannot participate in a jury.)

Rules of Evidence—United States

Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules, Report to the Standing Committee, November 2017, available at <http://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2017-11-15-evidence_rules_committee_report_0.pdf>

This report from a body responsible for recommending changes to rules of the United States apex court setting out the rules of evidence for federal courts summarises discussions on: a conference on the admissibility of forensic evidence (foreshadowing a committee role ‘short of a rule change’); a potential change to the ‘residual’ hearsay exception (focusing more on circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness and less on other factors); consideration of expanded substantive use of prior inconsistent statements (rejecting blanket admissibility but considering admissibility of recorded statements); consideration of similar fact evidence (rejecting an ‘active contest’ requirement, but considering a requirement for a non-propensity inference); a suggested hearsay exception for evidence that provides a context for admitted hearsay; possible abolition of the potential admission of non-honesty convictions of testifying defendants; a possible response to a Supreme Court ruling removing jury secrecy for racism allegations; and continued monitoring of whether evidence law rules may violate the constitutional right to confrontation.

Victims—United States

Kentucky Senate and House of Representatives, Senate Bill 3, January 2018, available at <http://www.lrc.ky.gov/recorddocuments/bill/18RS/SB3/SCS1.pdf>

Senate and Assembly of the State of Nevada, Senate Joint Resolution No 17, June 2017, available at <https://www.leg.state.nv.us/Session/78th2015/Bills/SJR/SJR17_EN.pdf>

Oklahoma Senate and House of Representatives, Joint Resolution No 46, April 2017, available at <http://webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/cf_pdf/2017-18%20ENGR/SRES/SJR46%20ENGR.PDF>

These three legislative documents will allow voters from three American states the option of voting to amend their state constitutions to include new rights for crime victims, including rights to be present at most criminal proceedings (on the same ‘basis’ as the accused) and a right to fairness and due consideration of safety, dignity and privacy, but without party status or any effect on the accused’s presumption of innocence. The proposals—which follow six earlier successful ones along similar lines in California (which voted in 2008) and more recently Illinois, Montana (although that reform was overturned by the state Supreme Court late last year because of the omnibus nature of the amendments), the Dakotas and Ohio—are known as Marsy’s Law, after a 1983 murder victim, whose brother has provided financial backing for the reforms.