Section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 Essay -- common

To a man with a shape everything looks like a nail. I would submit this is the case in regards to function 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. The courts have been disposed(p) a tool and since its introduction have been wantonly applying it case after(prenominal) case. I will endeavour to argue that s.78 has been developed into the tool the courts want as oppose to the tool they have been granted and the wording of the principle ignored. The point of s.78 has been glossed over and it has instead been utilized as if it were a subdivision of s.76. Whilst unnecessary is perhaps the wrong term to use the purpose of s.78 has been defeated.I would first draw attention to how section 78 of PACE should be used. A judge has the discretion to use s.78 if the yard would have such(prenominal) an adverse military group on the achromasia of the proceedings that the court ought not to admit it. The key issue here is that the exclusion has to relate to the fairness of the proce edings. Whilst is states that circumstance surrounding the manner in which the evidence was obtained are relevant, the true reason for its exclusion remains a question of the fairness of proceedings. An example of this can be found in the case of OLoughlin where the suspect would not be able to cross-examine the witness. This would be a strict diligence of s.78 where the fairness of the proceedings is adversely effected. Unfortunately cases like this are a rarity. Bernard Robertson directs us to a long list of authorities in his clause where the application of s.78 is inappropriate and/or wrong . Further to this he advocates his rock that cause must proceed effect. The cause is the admission of the evidence and the effect is the unfair proceedings. Only after the cause (the ad... ...1994 98 Cr. App. R. 209 DPP v marshall (Robert Dennis) 1988 3 All E.R. 683 M. A. Gelowitz, role 78 of the police and criminal evidence act 1984 inwardness ground or no mans land?, L. Q. Rev. 3 27, 1990 at 329 M. A. Gelowitz, Section 78 of the police and criminal evidence act 1984 Middle ground or no mans land?, L. Q. Rev. 327, 1990 at 329 R May, bazar play at Trial an interim assessment of section 78 of the police and criminal evidence act 1984, Criminal Law Review, 1988 R v Harwood 1989 Crim. L.R. 285 Andrew L.-T. Choo, Entrapment and Section 78 of Pace, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 51, No. 2 (Jul., 1992), pp. 236-238 Andrew L.-T. Choo, Entrapment and Section 78 of Pace, The Cambridge Law Journal, Vol. 51, No. 2 (Jul., 1992), pp. 236-238 R v branchia and Ranuana 1989 Crim. L.R. 358 R v Samuel 1988 2 WLR 920 R v Foster 1987 Crim LR 821