Gateway (c):

Gateway (c):

1. s.102 defines important explanatory evidence if without it the court or jury would find it impossible or difficult properly to understand other evidence in the case AND its value for understanding the case as a whole is substantial.

2. When it is important explanatory evidence (s.101(1)(c)

3. Sawoniuk (2000): S was charged with 2 counts of murdering Jewish civilians. Two witnesses B and Z gave evidence relating to the 2 counts. Two further witnesses gave evidence of how they had seen S rounding up and maltreating Jews but S was not charged with these murders. On appeal it was held that the evidence relating to the uncharged murders was held admissible on a "broad" basis.

4. Lord Bingham CJ: "Criminal charges cannot be fairly judges in a factual vacuum."

5. Pronick (2006): P had been convicted of attempted rape of his partner. The trial judge admitted P's conviction for assault as well as his partner's evidence evidence relating to 7 counts of alleged assault on her. He stated that it was necessary material for the jury's consideration and its importance to the jury was likely to be substantial.

6. Saint (2010): S was charged with raping V in a car park. Evidence that S liked dogging and swinging whilst wearing camouflage clothing had been WRONGLY admitted because it did not satisfy the test of without it the jury would find it impossible/difficult to understand other evidence. The shows that the statutory gateway is restrictive!

7. The judge has discretion to exclude evidence which may otherwise be admissible under gateway c because of the dangers of "background evidence."

8. It is important that this gateway is not used to admit evidence which can otherwise be admitted via other gateways.