Evidence Ii Question Paper

Evidence Ii

Course:Bachelor Of Laws

Institution: Kenyatta University question papers

Exam Year:2011

KENYATTA UNIVERSITY
UNIVERSITY EXAMINATIONS 2010/201
SECOND SEMESTER EXAMINATIONS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR
OF LAWS
LPR 203: EVIDENCE II

INSTRUCTIONS
a) Question one is compulsory
b) Answer any other two questions

QUESTION ONE
Jeptoo, a mother of two girls, Jeruto and Jerono aged ten and five years respectively, would be happy to forget the events that occurred on 19th February 2011.
On that day, Jeptoo, on a return trip from the village stream, caught Kipsang', her husband defiling Jeruto in their matrimonial bed. Jeptoo let out a scream that attracted almost the entire village. Kipsang' was arrested and handed over to the police. Jeruto was rushed to the nearby health centre for medical check-up and treatment. She was diagnosed as being severely traumatized and infected with syphilis.
At the police station, Kipsang' declined to talk to the police officers or record any statements but instead demanded to talk to his lawyer. Meanwhile, in the police cells, Kipsang' became friendly with one Kimani to whom he confided certain things. Among these was an admission that prior to his arrest, he had planned and executed, with the full knowledge of his lawyer, the kidnap of the daughter of a prominent businessman for which a ransom of one million shillings was paid.
Kipsang' is now charged with defilement, incest and kidnapping. The prosecution intends to call his wife, daughter Jerono, his lawyer and Kimani as key prosecution witnesses. The lawyer has now formally rejected the invitation to testify citing legal professional privilege on the kidnap charge. The defence objects to the testimony of Jeruto on the ground that she is too traumatized and of Jeptoo that she is the wife of the accused.

a)Identify the principles, rules and issues if any, coming out of the above facts and give a legal opinion backed by case law and statutory provisions.

b)Briefly evaluate the treatment of banker's books in our law of evidence.

QUESTION TWO

"Where corroboration is necessary and the trial court has neither directed itself to the need nor has in fact looked for corroboration, this court will not itself consider whether corroboration existed unless the circumstances are such that it is quite clear that there has been no failure of justice."
Spry,J.,in Muroki Kiori & Another v. R, Criminal Appeal No. 150 of 1964 (unreported)

With the above quote in mind, evaluate the rationale for corroboration and the circumstances that require corroboration. Use decided cases and statute, whenever appropriate.

QUESTION THREE
Define and with the use of appropriate case law and examples, evaluate the cocept of reaql evidence and its contribution to the administration of justice.

QUESTION FOUR
On one windy evening in December 2010, John and Jack were walking along River Road in downtown Nairobi towards their parked salon car. Suddenly, two uniformed policemen appeared and accosted them.
The two policemen, without any preliminaries at all, proceeded to arrest and search them. This occurred in full view of the public.
On John, the policemen found several rolls of bhang while Jack had no incriminating material on his person. The policemen then proceeded to frog-march them to their car and search it. In the boot of the car, an assortment of electrical items, suspected to be stolen were found.
John and Jack were then informed formally that they were under arrest for possession of illegal drugsand handling stolen property. They were promptly shepherded to the police station. Police records were checked and it was discovered that both John and Jack were on the wanted list on suspicion of committing various crimes.
At the station, they were approached by a police constable who actively persuaded them to cooperate with the police in the hope that a plea bargain could be worked out if they admitted the offences. They requested to be given an opportunity to consider the proposal and talk to their lawyer. This request was granted.
Meanwhile, the police connected a microphone in the room to a tape-recorder. The entire conversation Jack and John had, admitting various new crimes and also with their lawyer was taped. John and Jack finally decided to confess to the charges of illegal possession of drugs and handling stolen property to the constable who dutifully recorded the same.
John and Jack were eventually arraihned in court charged with the two offences of handling stolen property and being in possession of illegal drugs in addition to five other offences which came to the attention of the police from the tape recording. The prosecution intends to rely on the written confessions and on the tape recording.
Jack and John have now approached you for advice on their legal position based on the police evidence and the charges facing them. Assuming the facts to be strictly stated above, advice them based on case law, statute law and the constitution.

QUESTION FIVE

"Oral evidence is generally inadmissible to contradict, vary, add to or subtract from the terms of a document. However, there are certain circumstances in which oral evidence is admissible."

With the aid of statute and case law, evaluate the above statement.

📘 Access 10,000+ CBC Exams With Marking Schemes

Evidence Ii Question Paper

More Question Papers

Exams With Marking Schemes

End Term 3 Exams

Mid Term Exams

End Term 1 Exams

Opener Exams

Full Set Exams