While Section 10A(a) The Evidence Ordinance deals with the admissibility of the foreign statement, Section 10A(c) To the Evidence Ordinance Dealing with the evidentiary weight of the statement, after it passed the admissibility tests and was accepted as evidence. As mentioned, Section 10A(c) To the Evidence Ordinance Allows the court to prefer what is said in a written foreign statement by a witness to his testimony in court, in accordance with the circumstances enumerated therein. On the other hand, it is possible that an external statement will be accepted as admissible evidence, but the court will not see fit to take precedence over the witness's testimony. It is also possible thatThe court will accept the statement not as a single piece, so that it may split it, accept parts of it as trustworthy and reject other parts as unreliable.
This section states that the court may prefer the statement to the testimony of the witness in light of the "The circumstances of the matter". The court must explain this decision, because the provision constitutes an exception to the rule prohibiting the admission of hearsay testimony, when the concept of "Reasoning" was given a broad meaning (see front About the Evidence, at p. 348; Criminal Appeal 869/81 מדינת ישראל N. SnirIsrSC 38(4) 194). A statement that was accepted as credible then comes in the shoes of the witness and the conviction of the defendant can be based, in the appropriate circumstances, subject to the existence of something to support the statement (Section 10A(d) To the Evidence Ordinance).
In a Criminal Appeal 949/80 Shohami v. State of Israel, IsrSC 35(4) 62, 69-70, the Supreme Court addressed the considerations that are supposed to guide the court when it comes to giving preference to the testimony of the witness in court:
"The operation of section 10A involves the application of methods of examination and criticism, the expression of which is the determination of a series of issues, which the court compares before its eyes, when it considers the acceptance of a statement as evidence and its preference over testimony in court. These issues are outlined in section 10a(c) of the aforementioned Ordinance, which states that the court may rely its findings on a statement that was accepted under section 10A, or on part thereof, and it may prefer the statement to the testimony of the witness in court, all if it deems it necessary to do so in view of the circumstances of the case, including the circumstances of the statement, the evidence presented at trial, the witness's conduct in the trial, and the signs of truth that were discovered during the trial. As in any matter, which involves the evaluation of testimony and the consideration of its reliability, this is not, of course, an exhaustive list of the issues to be considered by the court, nor a determination that each of the components, which found their place in section 10a(c), must find its concrete expression in every decision that relates to a particular statement; Similar to the method taken in section 53 of the aforementioned Ordinance, there are main issues or factors that can be used to decide and choose between statement and testimony, when the question arises in a tangible way.