burden and standard of proof.

Question 1

burden of proof

Answer 1

this is the part that has to prove the fact of the case.

Question 2

what is the standard of proof.

Answer 2

this is the degree of probability to which it must be proved.

beyond reasonable doubt (miller)

jury have to be sure of guilt (summers)

Question 3

woolmingtom v dpp

Answer 3

that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the guilt as to the defence of insanity and subject to statutory exception.

no matter the charge or the trial the the principle that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the prisoner is part of the common law.

Question 4

insanity.

Answer 4

there is a presumption of sanity m’naghten 1843.

proof on balance of probability sideman

same applies to diminished responsibility.

compatible with the echo presumption innocence. r v fave

Question 5

statutory exceptions

Answer 5

numerous exceptions.
magistrates court act exemption provisions excuse of qualifications.

equivalent rule in indictable offences by necessary implication to be justified in other circumstances.

Question 6

evidential burdens.
(where defence have to adduce infromation on the defence for the presecition to dispove)

Answer 6

self defence

loss of control coroners and justice act.

necessity (pommel)

duress (gill)

victims of human trafficking and modern day slavery. 2015.

consent in circumstances specified in other circumstances.

Question 7

echo 6(2)

Answer 7

everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law.

Question 8

salabiaku v France.

Answer 8

presumption of facts of law must be confined with reasonable limits which. consider the importance of what is at stake and maintain the rights of the defence.

Question 9

standard of proof criminal case.

Answer 9

requires the jury to be sure of guilt which is the same as but no more than the proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt r v smith.

Question 10

youth justice and criminal evidence act 1999 s.41.
past sexual behaviours

Answer 10

general exclusion of evidence on complainants sexual behaviours with both d and other men.

applies to cross examination examination of c and evidence of other witnesses but not to c evidence in their.

evidence admissible under four gateways.

Question 11

criteria for leave.
s.41 yjcea

Answer 11

41(6) specific instance of sexual behaviours.

41(3,5) a non-consent issue b contemporaneous acts c similarity rebuttal.

41(4) purpose not to impungent credibility.

41(2b) refusal might render conviction unsafe.

Question 12

r v t 2024

Answer 12

alleged rape by husband
wife gave evidence of consensual sex during marriage s.41 does not apply adducted by prosecution.
d wanted to ask whether wife was a lesbian and conflicted about sexuality

wife had motive to fabricate as she had traditional christian values but could use rape to explain change in sexual orientation.

or she had interpreted it as rape in light of her sexual lesbian identity.

Question 13

is sexual orientation sexual behaviour.

Answer 13

sexual behaviourr means behaviour or sexual experience whether involving any accused or other person but excluding anything alleged to have taken place as part of the event which the subject of the charge is getting accused.

cc suggest that sexual orientation can be suggestive of sexual activity but depends on the circumstances.

Question 14

specific instance requirement.

Answer 14

general questions about prostitution and homosexuality ect inadmissible.
not mentioned expressly in trial judge rulings but ca said sufficient reason to exclude.

Question 15

gateways in sexual history cases

Answer 15

relate to issue other than consent.

behaviour at about the same time.

behaviour but to like to explain as a coincidence.

Question 16

s.43(1a) gateway relevant to an issue other than consent.
eg fabrication

Answer 16

Reasonable belief in consent

Motive to fabricate r v t

In R v T alleged relevance was to motive to fabricate ie using rape as an explanation change of sexual orientation

Relevance depends on some generalisation linking lesbianism with fabrication.

Question 17

previous sexual relationships with the defendant.

Answer 17

In r v t evidence of consensual sexual relationship during marriage elicited by prosecution common where relationship considered essential background events.

s.41 doesn’t apply to prosecution
if d wanted to adduce such evidence would have to use one of 4 gateways

s.43(1)(a) relevance to an issue other than consent d;s reasonable belief in consent
more commonly

s.43(1)© behaviour too similar to be explained as a coincidence

Question 18

r v f 2005 ewca crim 493 (impunging credibility)

Answer 18

Alleged motive to fabricate

allegations of child abuse was anger at ending adult relationship.

Evidence admissible to show adult relationship was fully consensual

Question 19

impending credibility.

Answer 19

when evidence about previous sexual behaviour can be properly admitted.

situations where motive is advaned.

R v T

Question 20

refusal might render unsafe conviction.

Answer 20

Brings us back to the issue reasonable doubt – standard of proof doesn’t require exclusion of every speculative possibility.

whole basis for questionig was entirly speculative.. might have had the n result in rendering a conclusion of the jury unsafe.