R v Ruston
1786 · 1 Leach 408
Posted By lanbuk.com
- Facts
- A witness who was deaf and could not speak was tendered. He could be made to understand the oath, and he could answer by signs through a person who understood them.
- Issue
- Is a deaf witness, who does not speak, competent?
- Held
- Yes, if the oath can be explained to him and his answers can be interpreted. The court receives the evidence through that interpreter.
- Principle
- does not require speech. It requires understanding of the oath and a means of answering.
- Why it matters
- Deafness is not a bar to competence if the oath can be explained and the answers interpreted.
Words and Latin in this note
- Competence
- The law's permission to give evidence. A person who does not understand the duty to tell the truth, or whom a rule excludes, is not competent. Open the note.
For study only. By lanbuk.com. Always check current sources and consult a qualified professional.