Criminal Justice Act 1988
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
23 First-hand hearsay.
(1) Subject— (a) to subsection (4) below; and (b) to paragraph 1A of Schedule 2 to the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 (evidence given orally at original trial to be given orally at retrial); . . . (c) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a statement made by a person in a document shall be admissible in criminal proceedings as evidence of any fact of which direct oral evidence by him would be admissible if— (i) the requirements of one of the paragraphs of subsection (2) below are satisfied; or (ii) the requirements of subsection (3) below are satisfied. (2) The requirements mentioned in subsection (1)(i) above are— (a) that the person who made the statement is dead or by reason of his bodily or mental condition unfit to attend as a witness; (b) that— (i) the person who made the statement is outside the United Kingdom; and (ii) it is not reasonably practicable to secure his attendance; or (c) that all reasonable steps have been taken to find the person who made the statement, but that he cannot be found. (3) The requirements mentioned in subsection (1)(ii) above are— (a) that the statement was made to a police officer or some other person charged with the duty of investigating offences or charging offenders; and (b) that the person who made it does not give oral evidence through fear or because he is kept out of the way. (4) Subsection (1) above does not render admissible a confession made by an accused person that would not be admissible under section 76 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. (5) . . .
23 First-hand hearsay.
(1) Subject— (a) to subsection (4) below; and (b) to paragraph 1A of Schedule 2 to the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 (evidence given orally at original trial to be given orally at retrial); . . . (c) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a statement made by a person in a document shall be admissible in criminal proceedings as evidence of any fact of which direct oral evidence by him would be admissible if— (i) the requirements of one of the paragraphs of subsection (2) below are satisfied; or (ii) the requirements of subsection (3) below are satisfied. (2) The requirements mentioned in subsection (1)(i) above are— (a) that the person who made the statement is dead or by reason of his bodily or mental condition unfit to attend as a witness; (b) that— (i) the person who made the statement is outside the United Kingdom; and (ii) it is not reasonably practicable to secure his attendance; or (c) that all reasonable steps have been taken to find the person who made the statement, but that he cannot be found. (3) The requirements mentioned in subsection (1)(ii) above are— (a) that the statement was made to a police officer or some other person charged with the duty of investigating offences or charging offenders; and (b) that the person who made it does not give oral evidence through fear or because he is kept out of the way. (4) Subsection (1) above does not render admissible a confession made by an accused person that would not be admissible under section 76 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. (5) . . .
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.