Law_of_Evidence_in_Kenya

Recommendations

Info

this is because it is hard for any human being to make a vivid identification at night of a personand the same may be required for repudiated or retracted confession.8.5 SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE, CHANGES IN TECHNOLOGY ANDCORROBORATIONThe law corroboration is meant to support or confirm the evidence given in court by anotherperson. It has been argued that some of the development in methods of collecting evidence likescientific and technological means like CCTV and DNA test are much accurate and thereforerequirement of corroboration to support such evidence has been seen unnecessary. The truth isthat such evidences can prove identity without requirement of the supporting evidence. This isthe reason why people feel it is not necessary to corroborate such evidence. The judiciary asalways held that such evidence still need to be corroborated because of many reasons. One is thatsuch evidence can also be fabricated so there is still lack of trust on the persons who carry suchevidences, two is that some of the scientific evidences are not accurate to the extent that it canstand on its own recently identical twins in India who one was charged for rape were taken forDNA test just for the result to be positive for both.Professor Buchanan Bill “on the internet it is very hard to take one source of evidence asdefinitive source as things could be changed and people can have different identities. Weshould always get some physical and traditional corroboration.” The third issue is, for a judgeto accept the source without corroboration, he might have to verify that the technology or scienceplaced is accepted in the field of origin and it must be accepted generally and not by some peopleonly. Fry v United States (fry rule) 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923). It was said, “Just when ascientific principle or discovery crosses the line between the experimental and demonstrablestages is difficult to define. Somewhere in this twilight zone the evidential force of the principlemust be recognized, and while courts will go a long way in admitting expert testimony deducedfrom a well-recognized scientific principle or discovery, the thing from which the deduction ismade must be sufficiently established to have gained general acceptance in the particular field inwhich it belongs.”Republic v Edward Kirui (2008) eKLR the case involved a police officer who was caught oncamera shooting a person in Kisumu during the post-election violence. The video ev.idence
given before the court was not enough to prove the accused was guilty. These evidences facemany challenges to ensure there correctness need corroboration.In cases such as sexual offences it will still be necessary to corroborate before conviction, in asmuch as DNA test of sperms can be taken and found to be positive does not in itself mean therewas rape and it must be proof more than just that evidence.9.0 EVIDENCE AMENDMENT BILLThe rule of evidence has been that evidence that requires corroboration itself cannot corroborateanother, the rule exists by the fact that a non-reliable evidence will not make another non-reliableevidence to be relied upon. In this case non-reliable does not mean incredible but credible butneed support so that the jury can rely on it for decision Shida Kazungu Baya and 4 others vRepublic eKLR, it was held that evidence that requires corroboration cannot be corroborated byevidence which requires corroboration itself. Most of the amendment bills in many countriesHong Kong, Scotland have proposed that such corroboration should be allowed. The bills havealso proposed abolition of corroboration in sexual offences. The New South Wales evidenceamendment Act 2012 included, inferences can be made in when defendant keeps silence inserious indictable offences. The Singapore proposed amendments to the evidence Act includereduce in the stringent measures taken to prove electronic evidence since the technology is nowmore sophisticated and made quite improvements therefore some measures are not necessary.They have also expanded the admissibility of hearsay and expert opinion evidence. The Victoriaparliament Jury amendment proposes that the jury, defence counsel and prosecutor shall notinfer, suggest or say that a child‟s evidence is bad on count of age or any person‟s evidence isbad on count of incapability or inability. This is to strike out corroboration.In Kenya there is no such amendment bill pending or proposed in parliament and so we stick tothe common law and the current evidence rules.10.0 CONCLUSIONCorroboration evidence therefore confirms or supports a credible evidence given in court.Corroboration is very important in evidence and abolishing it will interfere with the justiceprocess especially criminal justice. However it is a concern that the rules of corroboration shouldbe settled and at least a measure developed so that we can ascertain the law of corroboration and
Page 1 and 2: CORROBORATION1.0 OVERVIEWCorroborat
Page 3 and 4: The definition above confines corro
Page 5 and 6: accused had been charged for indece
Page 7 and 8: IDENTIFICATION CASES; this is where
Page 9 and 10: tribunals are, with rare exceptions
Page 11: 8.3 Where corroboration is not requ
Page 15 and 16: Sexual Offences Act No 3 of 2006G.B
Page 17 and 18: Character Evidence in Kenyan LawThe
Page 19 and 20: evidence of a fact or directly rele
Page 21 and 22: person can be questioned on his pre
Page 23 and 24: offence with which the defendant is
Page 25 and 26: OPINION EVIDENCEAn opinion is a vie
Page 27 and 28: some professional or technical matt
Page 29 and 30: Experts are brought by the parties
Page 31 and 32: Opinion evidence is not binding to
Page 33 and 34: Section 50 (1) of the Evidence Act
Page 36: REFERENCESAllen, C. (2008). Practic

Law_of_Evidence_in_Kenya

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?