Summary of Subramaniam v. Public Prosecutor
Facts: D charged with possession of ammunition and in defense, D claimed that he was captured by terrorists and was working under duress. Trial court excluded the statements made by the terrorists as hearsay.
Issue: Were the statements hearsay?
Rationale: The statements were not presented to prove the truth of the matter asserted but to prove whether D was reasonable to act under duress. So even if the terrorist had said to D “I plan on killing you,” we don’t care whether this statement was actually true and whether the terrorist was being truthful. All we care is whether such statement could cause duress. So not hearsay.