Discussion on Evidence Law Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Discussion on Evidence Law - Essay Example Evidence must conform to certain rules in order to be admissible. At the trial of A, witness W1 indicated that A and another person was seen packaging white powder. Witness W2 indicated that A was heard telling to someone that B and A would be selling stuff in a few months. W1 again testified that A and B met H on a trip to Sydney who sold amphetamines and wanted A and B to sell these in Canberra. W2 further testified that A and B were seen injecting amphetamines. So the evidence for the cases can be summarised as follows: 2. W1 - seen A and B on a trip to Sydney where they met H who sells amphetamines and asked A and B for partnerships. This evidence may be relevant as it provides as clear lead that A and B were having business plans with H who sells amphetamines Here some of the elements of evidence are excluded as items 3 and 1. According to the evidence given here, it may be suggested that the other items of evidence are relevant as the facts of the issue are more or less likely (see in Odgers, 2004). Evidence that on four consecutive days in February 2005 A purchased packets of 'Polecat' brand pseudoephedrine to a total of twenty packets from three chemists in various Canberra suburbs. It is accepted that pseudoephedrine is a core constituent of amphetamines. EFTPOS records showing that various pieces of apparatus which can... 4. W2 - seen A and B using and injecting amphetamines. This is a relevant evidence as it suggests that A and B were habituated with the uses of amphetamines. The evidence is strong against A and B who are suspected of selling and encouraging the use of narcotics that is illegal and severely punished. Here some of the elements of evidence are excluded as items 3 and 1. According to the evidence given here, it may be suggested that the other items of evidence are relevant as the facts of the issue are more or less likely (see in Odgers, 2004). QUESTION 2 (10 MARKS) The prosecution will seek to lead the following evidence at the trial of A: Evidence that on four consecutive days in February 2005 A purchased packets of 'Polecat' brand pseudoephedrine to a total of twenty packets from three chemists in various Canberra suburbs. It is accepted that pseudoephedrine is a core constituent of amphetamines. EFTPOS records showing that various pieces of apparatus which can be used in the production of amphetamines and which closely resemble, but are not identifiable as, some of the items found in C's premises were purchased from a wholesaler in Sydney using A's EFTPOS card on December 13 2004. Evidence from a witness, W3 who worked at the wholesaler's Sydney premises, that J, with whom A has been living in a de facto relationship for some years, was the person who purchased the items. EFTPOS records showing that A's EFTPOS card was used to purchase petrol in Sydney on five occasions in November and December 2004 including on December 13 2004. Evidence from a witness, W4, that A habitually gave J his EFTPOS card to use. Is this evidence admissible and if so on what