Friday, 15 January 2010 9:42 AM

Sasako Vs DPP

Good effort Sasako on the above issue.

Just some few points I wants some clarifications on. Sasako mention in one of his articles in the Solomon Star that there are new Evidence(s) available that allege to point to Carol Edwards to be the Driver of the vehicle that killed the deceased.

However, my point is, are all the evidence(s) that are available will not be subjected to dispute in court?. I have doubt on this because my simple understanding is that not ALL evidence(s) that are available will be used in court. One of these is "hearsay evidence". "me hearem ota yia nao telem yia". Court will not accept these evidence and will be inadmissable in court as far as the law of evidence is concern.

Another is whether those new evidence (s) were favorable or not to use against the accused in this case. If the court finds that that piece of evidence will be unfavorable to use against the accused, court will not accept such kind of evidence(s) and will certainly exclude it.

The point here is not all Evidence available will be used in court. As such, I am just wondering it may be the point here that the Prosecutions sees that it has a weak case to pursue in court that resulted in discharging (or what ever they say) of Edwards on the face of the new evidence (s) as allege by Sasako.

It is our general common understanding that when we hear certain news or media and we tend to focus on it literally. WHilst on the other hand, Law is what that followed certain principles and concepts.

Our general perceptions on a particular issue may be true but when it comes to law, it will be a different as it will be subject to certain practice and procedures if a particular issue is raise.

No wonder, for instance in a particular case, the public may already concluded that the accused in that case is already guilty but when in the end when the case goes to court, the accused is aquitted.

We cannot be so sure if all the evidence available will help the case. It would be more difficult if potential witness (s) are relunctant to come forward to assist the investigators thus leave the prosecution little hope in obtaining a conviction in the end.

Thanks



Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this letter/article are those of Matt K. and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Solomon Times Online.

Other Letters to the Editor All Letters
By GEOFFREY MAURIASI USP, Lacuala Campus, Fiji
By CHARLES KOULI Gizo, Western Province
By JAQUE FRIEDMAN New Zealand