R+v+Stephenson

Facts

 * Motor car accident in which 3 people died, A was charged with 3 counts of culpable driving causing death.
 * V’s car was travelling Sth intending to make a right hand turn, green light. A was driving Nth (admitted speeding), goes through the intersection. Prosecution claimed the light was red (disputed fact).
 * A hits V’s car.
 * Its unknown which of the Vs was driving – bodies scattered, survivor had amnesia.
 * A’s counsel seeks to cross-examine a medical witness as to whether the body of the injured person contained any drugs or alcohol.
 * Can counsel for the A, seek to lead evidence that one of the four occupants may have at sometime consumed some alcohol or drugs? Relevant?
 * Accused was clearly negligent, but the question was whether he was so negligent that it was culpable driving. If the driver of the car had consumed some alcohol, the driver might have been affected by the alcohol. If the driver had been affected by alcohol, the driver may have started to move the car at a point of time when it was unsafe to do so. If this was the case, there may have been some element of contributory negligence by the driver of the car, and that may mean that culpable driving causing death was too severe.
 * Thus, the probative value would be increased compared to the prejudicial affect, but it still remains of little relevance, because the A had admitted negligence by saying he was speeding.

Held

 * Judge – Not all evidence which is logically relevant is legally admissible, it may be too remote, and thus irrelevant, as its weight is so minimal that it has no affect on the culpability in relation to the offence.