Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vaasan HO 14.01.1964 AI generated

Evidence from a witness with no trust and a prior conviction for theft was rejected, leading to dismissal.

Case Number Vaasan HO 14.01.1964
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court dismissed the prosecution because the sole witness, A, had been convicted of theft and lacked public trust, rendering their testimony inadmissible. No other evidence was presented to support the charges against B regarding the sale of the liquor bottle. Consequently, the prosecution failed to meet the burden of proof required for a conviction.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Lainvoimainen syytteen hylkääminen, kun ainoa todistaja oli tuomittu väärästä valasta ja kansalaisluottamusta vailla; todistajan maine ja edellinen tuomio ratkaisevat todisteiden arvon rikosasioissa.

Keywords

AI generated
witness credibility prior criminal conviction lack of public trust insufficient evidence dismissal of prosecution hearsay evidence burden of proof
AI generated
kko-precedent_2000_62
Supreme Court allows retrial in criminal appeal when lower court misjudged witness credibility without new evidence.
kko-other_1997_477
Supreme Court dismisses appeal when lower courts fail to justify acquittal under evidence rules.
kko-other_2001_1598
Supreme Court dismissed appeal for late submission of case file to lower court in criminal proceedings.
kko-other_2009_1487
Supreme Court held lower court must provide main trial documents to defendant upon request.
kko-other_2001_1203
Supreme Court dismisses appeal regarding witness credibility for false statements supported by two witnesses and a guarantee.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Koska kihlakunnanoikeudessa todistajana kuullun A:n, joka oli tuomittu väärästä valasta ja oli kansalaisluottamusta vailla ja joka oli ilmoittanut välittäneensä sen väkijuomapullon, jonka myymisestä B:tä syytettiin, kertomukselle ei voitu antaa arvoa todisteena jutussa, ja kun muutakaan näyttöä ei ollut esitetty, syyte hylättiin.

Lainvoimainen