The loss of the opportunity to cross-examine a hearsay declarant is not necessarily decisive of the s 137 balancing exercise, particularly where the declarant was a very young child who could not realistically have given meaningful evidence at trial. The danger of misuse of such evidence may be substantially ameliorated by appropriate jury directions under s 165. Comparative sentences in child sexual offence cases must be assessed by reference to the totality of circumstances, not mere numerical comparison, and marked differences in objective seriousness and subjective features limit their value as yardsticks.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 6 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.