Is there any case law where a witness was not an accomplice?
Saskatchewan, Canada
The following excerpt is from Rex v. Ratz, 1913 CanLII 185 (SK CA):
Whether the witness was or was not an accomplice is the only question for us to decide, as the case of The King v. Tate, [1908] 2 K.B.D. 680, makes it necessary for the Judge to caution the jury as to their believing his evidence without corroboration; and as this was not done in this case, and as there was no corroboration, there should be a new trial
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
Can a witness be compelled to leave the witness stand and inform himself on matters which he had no knowledge? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
In a criminal case, in what circumstances will a prosecutor be able to question a witness in question? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Can an employee who replaced merchandise on the shelf the previous night be called as witnesses? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Is a failure to provide a directory of all witnesses in a sexual assault case a valid ground for setting aside the conviction and ordering a new trial? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the effect of failing to call a material witness? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the effect of the absence of a doctor from the witness-box at trial? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for a jury to ask a witness to their opinion on competence? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
How is a witness permitted to refer to a ship’s log? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What is the test for reversing findings of fact based on credibility of witnesses? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
What authority has been followed in determining whether or not a witness who was a member of the legislature can testify as to statements made by a minister when introducing the bill? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
