R v Vaka

In the case of The Queen v Vaka, the respondent faced charges of attempted murder and wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm after allegedly attacking his 18-year-old daughter. The Crown sought leave to appeal against a pre-trial ruling by Heath J that admissions made by the respondent to a social worker, Ms Trixie Terry, were inadmissible. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and ruled that Ms Terry's evidence was admissible. The Court found that there was no justification for excluding the evidence on the basis of probative value versus prejudicial effect, nor on the basis that the evidence was unfairly obtained or so unreliable that it should be excluded. The Court held that the evidence had considerable probative value, and that the jury would be well placed to assess the reliability of the evidence. The Court also found that there was nothing about the circumstances surrounding the making of the respondent's statement that could justify the conclusion that the statement was unfairly obtained. The Court rejected the argument that the evidence was so unreliable that it should be excluded, noting that the evidence did not necessarily suggest that the respondent's state of mind was such that he was delusional and that his admissions to Ms Terry were unreliable.