What is Res Gestae?

How is Res Gestae defined?

Res Gestae is a way in which hearsay evidence can be included in a case in court. It is defined in Section 118 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 as, a statement made by a person so emotionally overpowered that the possibility of concoction or distortion can be disregarded.

What are examples of Res Gestae?

The most common forms of these kinds of statements are 999 calls and things said by the complainant soon after the incident. This is often captured on police body-worn cameras, and this footage can often be included in trials under res gestae.

What is the effect of Res Gestae?

This principle means that, if a complainant does not support a prosecution, it may still be possible to take a defendant to trial and offer evidence against them, by way of res gestae. Similarly, if a complainant retracts their witness statement and refuses to attend court to give evidence themselves, sometimes res gestae can be used to offer evidence from the complainant in a different way.

Therefore, it is not the case (as many people believe) that just because a complainant does not wish to attend court, for example, the case against a defendant will automatically be dropped. If the police/prosecution are in possession of evidence by means of someone making a complaint in a 999 call or providing details of the allegation upon police arrival at the scene, this could be admitted under res gestae.

What is the best used for Res Gestae?

In the case of R v Andrews [1987] AC 281, it was stated that in order to answer the question of whether the possibility of concoction or distortion could be disregarded, the judge must first consider the circumstances in which the statement was made, to be satisfied that the event was so unusual or traumatic as to dominate the victim’s thoughts. This would have the impact that what the complainant said was an instinctive reaction to that event, giving no real opportunity for reasoned reflection. The judge would then be entitled to conclude that the pressure of the event would exclude the possibility of concoction or distortion.

This would be as long as the statement was made at the approximate time of the event. This means that the thing said by the complainant must be sufficiently spontaneous, meaning it must be closely associated with the incident, so much so that it can be assumed the mind of the complainant was still dominated by the incident at the time they said that statement. Therefore, the judge must be satisfied that the incident which provided the trigger for the statement was still operative, effectively.

There may also be other special features to consider in a case, which relate to the possibility of concoction and distortion.

Recent Case Law – R v Barnaby

In the case of R v Barnaby [2015] EWHC 232 (Admin), the complainant made three 999 calls between 6:33am and 6:49am, claiming she was being assaulted by her partner. The police arrived at 6:55am. She informed them that her partner had just tried to strangle her. The police noticed marks on her neck and that she was very upset. However, the complainant refused to provide a statement. She did not give evidence at the trial. The judge allowed the communication with the police to be used as evidence at trial. This was because the police attended within six minutes. In that sense, her statements to the police were a continuation of the earlier exchanges with the 999 operator. It was concluded that the words of the complainant at that time would have been instinctive and spontaneous, due to the time frame in relation to the incident.

Olliers Solicitors – specialist criminal defence lawyers

If you would like to discuss how Olliers can proactively assist you in relation to a criminal allegation, please contact our new enquiry team either by email at info@olliers.com, or by telephone at 020 3883 6790 (London) or 0161 834 1515 (Manchester) or by completing the form below and our new enquiry team will contact you.