Are judges allowed to prevent jurys reading statements from the accused?

Elmo

Are judges allowed to prevent jurys reading statements from the accused?

Reloc8

It's not a matter of them being 'allowed'. They apply the law relating to admissibility of evidence. If a statement in writing of what an accused exists, and the prosecution or defence seek to rely upon it, and it is ruled to be admissible, the jury in a criminal trial will be given the statement or whatever portion of it is admissible ('statement' includes memoranda of interviews).

There are a myriad of reasons why a given piece of evidence including statements by an accused can be found inadmissible. If any apply, the evidence will not be admissible and therefore the jury will never hear of it.

Elmo

And if the jury ask for the statement?

eagle_&_bear

statements dont make up evidence. The jury will have been told that at the opening remarks of the trial

they take the evidence by what they hear from the witness box and any statements which are read and agreed to under section 21 of the CJA 1984.

The jury will have been told that they are not entitled to the statements so if they ask for it, they will be told that they can not have it.

Statements and the Book of Evidence are a guide to what the prosecution case will be, the only evidence the jury can base their judgment on is what they hear in open court.

It is different for things like photographs and maps etc but statements: no

Reloc8

Statements are perfectly possible of constituting evidence in a trial. e.g. a confession or other inculpatory statement which emanates from the accused (see opening question).

Elmo

Reloc8 wrote: »

Statements are perfectly possible of constituting evidence in a trial. e.g. a confession or other inculpatory statement which emanates from the accused (see opening question).

If the accused is represented as a lier by the prosecution due to their initial statement? can the jury request the initial statement?

eoin5

eagle_&_bear wrote: »

statements dont make up evidence. The jury will have been told that at the opening remarks of the trial

they take the evidence by what they hear from the witness box and any statements which are read and agreed to under section 21 of the CJA 1984.

The jury will have been told that they are not entitled to the statements so if they ask for it, they will be told that they can not have it.

Statements and the Book of Evidence are a guide to what the prosecution case will be, the only evidence the jury can base their judgment on is what they hear in open court.

It is different for things like photographs and maps etc but statements: no

So they read out the statements in court instead? Seems like a better way of doing it alright, gives the defense a way of defending statements.