| Evidence |
| Part of the common law series |
| Types of evidence |
| Testimony · Documentary Physical / Real · Digital Exculpatory · Scientific Demonstrative Eyewitness identification Genetic (DNA) · Lies |
| Relevance |
| Burden of proof · Laying a foundation Public policy exclusions Character · Habit · Similar fact |
| Authentication |
| Chain of custody Judicial notice · Best evidence rule Self-authenticating document Ancient document |
| Witnesses |
| Competence · Privilege Direct examination · Cross-examination · Redirect Impeachment · Recorded recollection Expert witness · Dead Man's Statute |
| Hearsay and exceptions |
| in English law · in United States law Confessions · Business records Excited utterance · Dying declaration Party admission · Ancient document Declaration against interest Present sense impression · Res gestae Learned treatise · Implied assertion |
| Other common law areas |
| Contract · Tort · Property Wills, trusts and estates Criminal law |
In the law of evidence, an implied assertion is a statement or conduct that infers some fact. There is varying opinion of whether hearsay evidence of implied assertions should be admissible in court to prove the truth of its contents. While they are considered hearsay, they are generally considered more reliable that regular statements as they are far less easy to fabricate.
In R v Sukadeve Singh [2006] EWCA Crim. 660, [2006] 2 Cr.App.R 12, Rose LJ giving the judgment of the court said this at paragraph 14:
- "When section 114 and section 118 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 are read together they, in our judgment, abolish the common law hearsay rules (save those which are expressly preserved) and create instead a new rule against hearsay which does not extend to implied assertions. What was said by the callers in Kearley [1] would now be admissible as direct evidence of the fact that there was a ready market for the supply of drugs from the premises, from which could be inferred an intention by an occupier to supply drugs. The view of the majority in Kearley [2] , in relation to hearsay, has been set aside by the Act."
In Sukadeve Singh various telephone entries were held not to be a matter stated within section 115 but to be implied assertions which were admissible because they were no longer hearsay. [3]
External links
References
- ^ R v Kearley (1992) 2 AC 228].
- ^ R v Kearley (1992) 2 AC 228].
- ^ WikiCrimeLine: Definition of hearsay evidence
| This legal term article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)




