Faustin Joseph v. R.,(PC) Crim. App. 3-A-68, 3/4/68, Platt J.

Faustin Joseph v. R.,(PC) Crim. App. 3-A-68, 3/4/68, Platt J.

A village executive officer was trying to settle a dispute, which resulted in hot words being exchanged and accused being charged with using abusive  language. Accused was convicted, largely on the basis of a letter written by the executive officer to the trial magistrate. The executive officer never appeared in court.

            Held: However well-meaning the action of the executive officer, “It is a cardinal rule that evidence put before the court should be by witnesses giving testimony on oath and prepared to face cross-examination.” If this were not the rule, a person might (as here never know on what the magistrate based his judgment. And justice would not be seen to be done, and if the evidence given were incorrect or biased, justice would not be done at all. Conviction quashed.