Hearsay evidence — availability of witness — value of goods allegedly stolen — Evidence Act 2006, ss 18 & 22. In this pretrial matter the Crown applied to lead hearsay evidence under s 22 of the Evidence Act. The evidence was the complainant's statement to the police, which consisted of a list of the property that was stolen from him. The Crown wanted to lead the statement as hearsay evidence as the complainant had returned to his home country and the Crown contended that there was no point calling him as a witness at trial just to give this brief evidence. The defendants argued that the complainant should be called as a witness so that he could be cross-examined on the value of the property and to ascertain whether his statement was accurate, given that English was his second language and there was no interpreter. The Court found that the value of the goods stolen could be determined from the evidence of a police constable who had compiled a list of stolen items that were found and returned to the complainant. Further, there was no reason to believe that the complainant's statement to the police was inaccurate, and to attempt to secure the complainant as a witness at trial would be unduly costly and time-consuming. Therefore, the Court ruled that the evidence was admissible under s 18 of the Evidence Act. Judgment Date: 9 July 2018.