(1) Evidence of a hearsay statement is not made inadmissible by section 117 if-

(a) the statement made by the declarant would be admissible had it been made while testifying in the action and would not itself be hearsay evidence, and

(b) the declarant is:

(i) unavailable as a witness, or

(ii) a witness, or will be a witness, subject to cross-examination concerning the hearsay statement; or

(iii) available as a witness and the party offering the evidence, has given reasonable notice to the court and every other party of his intention to offer the hearsay statement at the trial and that notice gave sufficient particulars (including the contents of the statement, to whom it was made, and, if known, when and where) to afford a reasonable opportunity to estimate the value of the statement in the action.

(2) In a criminal action where the prosecution offers evidence under clause (b) (iii) of subsection (1) of this section, the evidence shall not be admissible if an accused has given reasonable notice to the court and the prosecution that he objects to its admission.

(3) Nothing in this section shall preclude the prosecution from offering such evidence under any other clause of subsection (1) of this section or under any other provision of this Decree.

(4) In a criminal action evidence of a hearsay statement made by an accused shall not be admissible under subsection (1) of this section when offered by the accused unless the accused is or will be a witness subject to cross-examination concerning the hearsay statement.

(5) Evidence of a hearsay statement offered under clause (b) (i) of subsection (1) of this section shall not be admissible if the declarant is unavailable as a witness because the exemption, preclusion, disqualification, death, inability, absence or failure of recollection of the declarant was brought about by the wrongdoing of the proponent of his statement for the purpose of preventing the declarant from attending or testifying.