Evidence Act 1906

In any proceeding for an offence (the proceeding) one or more visually recorded interviews may be admitted as the whole or a part of the evidence in chief of a witness —

irrespective of the age or maturity of the witness at the time of the proceeding; and

even if the witness is capable of giving evidence at the proceeding.

A visually recorded interview with a person with a mental impairment is not to be admitted in the proceeding under subsection (1) unless the person is a special witness.

A visually recorded interview is not to be admitted in the proceeding under subsection (1) unless —

a transcript of it has been given to the accused; and

the accused and his or her counsel have, in accordance with the regulations, been given a reasonable opportunity to view the visually recorded interview.

Neither the accused nor his or her counsel is entitled to have possession of, or of a copy of —

a visually recorded interview; or

a visual recording of evidence on which a visually recorded interview is recorded or which incorporates a visually recorded interview.

A visually recorded interview is admissible under subsection (1) to the same extent as if statements made in it by the witness were given orally in the proceeding in accordance with the usual rules and practice of the court concerned.

If a visually recorded interview is admissible under subsection (1), the judge in the proceeding may give any directions the judge thinks fit as to —

the presentation of it and the excision of matters from it; and

the manner in which further evidence in chief of the witness may be given and in which any cross‑examination and any re‑examination of the witness is to be conducted in the proceeding.

A visually recorded interview is not to be admitted under subsection (1) if it has been edited or altered otherwise than in accordance with a direction under subsection (5)(a).

If a visually recorded interview of a witness is admitted under subsection (1), then, while the recording is played to the court, the witness must not be present in court, or be visible or audible by closed‑circuit television or by means of any similar technology to anyone in the court other than, in the case of a trial by jury, the judge.

The following provisions apply if the proceeding is on indictment —

if a visually recorded interview is admitted under subsection (1), the judge is to instruct the jury that the procedure is a routine practice of the court and that they should not draw any inference as to the accused’s guilt from the use of the procedure;

if the judge is deciding whether or not to warn the jury that it may be dangerous to convict on the evidence of the complainant alone because of the length of the period between the offence and the proceeding, the admission under subsection (1) of a visually recorded interview with the complainant is not a relevant factor except to the extent that the length of the period between the offence and the admission of the official visually recorded interview may have affected the ability to test the evidence so admitted;

the fact that there was a visually recorded interview that the prosecutor did not adduce under subsection (1) is not to be the subject of comment to the jury by the judge, the accused or the accused’s counsel.

Subsection (7)(c) does not prevent a judge from directing a jury about a breach of subsection (7)(c) by the accused or the accused’s counsel, if it is in the interests of justice to do so.