R v Tabbah; R v Tiriaki (No 5)

In this case, the respondents were convicted of various criminal offences, including assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The prosecution sought to introduce CCTV footage as evidence in the trial. The respondents argued that the footage should be excluded on the grounds that its probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice to them, pursuant to section 142 of the Evidence Act 1995. The court had to determine whether the footage was admissible under the Act. The legal issue was whether the probative value of the CCTV footage outweighed the risk of unfair prejudice to the respondents.

The court found that the CCTV footage was relevant to the case, but it was not automatically admissible. The court considered the probative value of the footage and whether the danger of unfair prejudice to the respondents outweighed its probative value. The court held that the probative value of the footage was significant, as it showed the respondents committing the offences, and therefore it should be admitted. However, the court also recognised the risk of unfair prejudice to the respondents, as the footage was likely to evoke strong emotions from the jury and could lead to a biased verdict against them. The court held that the probative value of the footage outweighed the danger of unfair prejudice, and therefore it was admissible.

The court held that the CCTV footage was admissible as evidence in the trial, as its probative value outweighed the danger of unfair prejudice to the respondents. The court found that the footage was relevant to the case, as it showed the respondents committing the offences, and therefore it was admissible. The court also held that the risk of unfair prejudice to the respondents was not significant enough to exclude the footage, as it was necessary to prove the offences charged. The court found that the probative value of the footage was significant, and therefore it should be admitted as evidence.

The final orders of the court were that the CCTV footage was admissible as evidence in the trial, and the respondents' appeal against their convictions was dismissed. The court held that the probative value of the footage outweighed the danger of unfair prejudice to the respondents, and therefore it was admissible. The court also held that the risk of unfair prejudice to the respondents was not significant enough to exclude the footage, as it was necessary to prove the offences charged. The court found that the respondents' convictions were safe and accurate, and therefore the appeal was dismissed.