Cases LegislationBeta Notebook Research Briefs

The Queen v MLW (No 2) [2017] NTSC 20 — Hearsay Rule — Barrister AI

The Queen v MLW (No 2)

[2017] NTSC 20

Supreme Court of the Northern Territory

More

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Evidence
2. › hearsay rule
3. › statement made by child to mother of what accused had said to the child
4. › child has no memory of statement made
5. › whether mother’s evidence admissible
6. › not led for hearsay purpose
7. › first-hand hearsay - Evidence (National Uniform Legislation) Act, s59(1), s62, s65
1. Evidence
2. › hearsay rule
3. › statement made by child to mother of what accused said to the child
4. › child has no memory of statement made
5. › mother’s evidence admissible
6. › whether evidence from witnesses who mother told what the child said admissible
7. › second-hand hearsay
8. › whether admissible to rebut attack on credit of mother’s testimony - Evidence (National Uniform Legislation) Act, ss62, 108(3), 192(2)

Case Details

Citation[2017] NTSC 20

CourtNTSC

JurisdictionNorthern Territory

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members.

Relies on2

2015A2 v R; KM v R; Vaziri v RNSWCCA 244
1994Rogers v RHCA 42

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in

See how it works