§ SECTION 159 · BSA 2023 · CHAPTER X — OF EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

Questions tending to corroborate evidence of relevant fact, admissible

Corroboration from the surrounding details. A witness a party means to corroborate may be questioned about other circumstances he observed at or near the time and place of the relevant fact — where the court thinks those circumstances, if proved, would support his testimony.

How to read Section 159

A witness may be asked about the incidental things he saw around the main fact — because proving those details can lend support to his account.

The witness

A witness whom it is intended to corroborate, giving evidence of a relevant fact.

The questions

May be asked about other circumstances he observed at or near the time or place of that relevant fact.

The condition

If the court thinks those circumstances, if proved, would corroborate his testimony as to the relevant fact.

The bare Act

The section in its own words — the rule and an illustration.

Section 159 · verbatim

When a witness whom it is intended to corroborate gives evidence of any relevant fact, he may be questioned as to any other circumstances which he observed at or near to the time or place at which such relevant fact occurred, if the Court is of opinion that such circumstances, if proved, would corroborate the testimony of the witness as to the relevant fact which he testifies.

Illustration

In short: this is a tool for building corroboration. When a witness whose account a party wishes to support testifies to a relevant fact, he may be questioned about the other circumstances he observed — the incidental details around the main event — at or near its time or place. The purpose is verification: if those surrounding details, on being independently proved, would corroborate his testimony about the relevant fact, the court will allow the questioning. The idea is that a witness who is truthful about the small, checkable things around an event is the more likely to be truthful about the event itself — and, conversely, a false account often trips up on the surrounding detail. The gate is the court’s opinion: the circumstances must be such that, if proved, they would corroborate. The illustration is the classic one for accomplice evidence — the incidents an accomplice describes on his way to and from the crime, though themselves unconnected with it, may be independently proved to corroborate his account of the crime itself.

→ This carries forward IEA 1872 § 156 — corroboration by proof of surrounding circumstances.

Glossary

intended to corroborate

A witness whose account a party wishes to support with confirming evidence.

relevant fact

The fact he testifies to that bears on the case.

other circumstances… at or near the time or place

Surrounding, incidental details around the main fact.

if the Court is of opinion… would corroborate

The court’s gate — the details must be capable of lending support.

independent evidence (illustration)

Separate proof of the surrounding details, which corroborates the main account.

corroboration

Confirmation of a witness’s testimony by other evidence.

The picture

Prove the checkable details around the event, and they lend weight to the account of the event itself.

The section, part by part

Tap a part — the picture-story tells it first; the word-by-word text and example follow.

The ruleThe illustration

the ruleAsk about the surrounding details — they can corroborate

In one lineA witness may be questioned about other circumstances he saw at or near the time and place of the relevant fact — if the court thinks they would, if proved, corroborate him.

When a witness whom it is intended to corroborate gives evidence of any relevant fact, he may be questioned as to any other circumstances which he observed at or near to the time or place at which such relevant fact occurred,ask about other circumstances he observed…the incidental things around the main event — what he saw at or near its time and place — are opened up.

if the Court is of opinion that such circumstances, if proved, would corroborate the testimony of the witness as to the relevant fact which he testifies.→ if, in the court’s view, they would corroboratethe gate is the court’s opinion that the details, if proved, would support his testimony.

ExampleA witness to a night-time incident is asked about a power cut, a passing train, or a stalled car he noticed nearby. If those can be independently proved, they lend credence to his account of the incident.

✗ Not thisNot every surrounding detail qualifies — only those the court thinks would, if proved, actually corroborate. It is not a licence to prove random, unhelpful facts.

the illustrationThe accomplice’s journey — corroborating the crime

In one lineAn accomplice’s incidents on the way to and from the robbery, though unconnected with it, may be independently proved to corroborate his account of the robbery itself.

A, an accomplice, gives an account of a robbery in which he took part. He describes various incidents unconnected with the robbery which occurred on his way to and from the place where it was committed. Independent evidence of these facts may be given in order to corroborate his evidence as to the robbery itself.verify the journey → corroborate the crimeif the incidental facts of his route check out, they support his evidence of the robbery — the classic aid to accomplice corroboration.

ExampleThe accomplice says that, en route, he passed a burning haystack and met a particular traveller. Proving those independently shows he really was where he claims — corroborating his account of the robbery, even though the haystack has nothing to do with it.

✗ Not thisCorroborating the journey does not prove the crime by itself — it lends support to the witness’s account. It answers the prudence of looking for corroboration of an accomplice (§ 138).

Connected provisions

§ 158 · back

IEA 1872, § 156

Carried forward — corroboration by proof of surrounding circumstances.

BSA 2023 § 159 — Questions tending to corroborate evidence of relevant fact, admissible