Volume 12 (2014)
Volume 11 (2013)
Volume 10 (2012)
Volume 8 (2010)
Volume 3 (2005)
Most Downloaded Articles
- Scientific Evidence in Europe -- Admissibility, Evaluation and Equality of Arms by Champod, Christophe and Vuille, Joëlle
- Comparative Observations on the Burden of Proof for Criminal Defences by Ho, Hock Lai
- The Narrative Fallacy by Menashe, Doron and Shamash, Mutal E
- Redefining Relevancy and Exclusionary Discretion in Sir James Fitzjames Stephen’s Indian Evidence Act of 1872: The Singapore Experiment and Lessons for Other Indian Evidence Act Jurisdictions by Chen, Siyuan
- Litigating Sex Crimes in the United States: Has the Last Decade Made Any Difference? by Raeder, Myrna S.
Confrontation and Compulsory Process: U.S. and European Approaches Compared
1University of Warwick
Citation Information: International Commentary on Evidence. Volume 9, Issue 2, ISSN (Online) 1554-4567, DOI: 10.2202/1554-4567.1118, January 2012
- Published Online:
This paper discusses the relationship between the English hearsay rule and the principles governing the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. While the provisions serve similar purposes, they do not always produce the same result. Two sorts of cases are discussed: cases where the hearsay rule admits evidence that should be excluded because it violates the defendants right to examine or have examined the witnesses against him, and cases where the hearsay rule excludes evidence that should be admitted to protect the defendants right to a fair trial. The treatment of these cases is contrasted to the treatment of similar cases under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.