Callis v Gunn

Facts

A man was asked by the police to give his fingerprints. He did. It was later said that he had been misled about whether he had to. The fingerprints were used against him.

Issue

Are fingerprints obtained by a trick, or by a false representation, admissible?

Held

Yes. Lord Parker CJ held that the court is concerned with relevance. Evidence obtained by a trick is admissible. A criminal judge has a discretion to exclude it if admission would be unfair. There was no unfairness here.

Principle

A false representation used to obtain evidence does not make the evidence inadmissible. Unfairness is a discretion, not an automatic rule.

Why it matters

It is the sentence the later cases start from. Kuruma is the Privy Council statement of the same rule. Payne is the case where the discretion was used the other way, because of a promise.

For study only. By lanbuk.com. Always check current sources and consult a qualified professional.