R v Kelsall (No 2)

The appeal before the court involved a decision to admit CCTV footage as evidence in the case against Kelsall. Kelsall was charged with drug trafficking offences and the footage in question was from two separate sources, intended to be shown side by side in court. Kelsall argued that the side-by-side presentation of the footage would be prejudicial and thus inadmissible. The court was required to determine whether the side-by-side presentation of the CCTV footage would unfairly prejudice the jury against the defendant, and if so, whether the footage should be excluded from the evidence presented to the jury.

The court considered the potential for prejudice in presenting the footage side by side, and whether this outweighed the probative value of the evidence. The court noted that the footage from the two sources was intended to corroborate each other and provide a comprehensive view of the events in question. The court held that there was no inherent prejudicial effect in presenting the footage side by side, and that the probative value of the evidence was significant. The court found that the footage was not inadmissible solely because it was to be presented side by side.

Accordingly, the court held that the CCTV footage was admissible, and the appeal was dismissed. The court determined that the potential for prejudice did not outweigh the probative value of the evidence, and that the side-by-side presentation would not unfairly prejudice the jury against the defendant. The court further held that the probative value of the evidence was significant, and that the footage was a crucial part of the prosecution's case. The court's decision ensures that relevant and probative evidence can be presented to the jury, while also protecting the defendant's right to a fair trial.