Character Evidence Flashcards
What is the definition of ‘bad character’ according to s.98 CJA 2003?
‘Bad character’ refers to evidence of a person’s misconduct, excluding evidence related to the alleged facts of the offence or misconduct connected to the investigation or prosecution.
How is ‘misconduct’ defined in s.112 CJA 2003?
‘Misconduct’ is defined as the commission of an offence or other reprehensible behaviour.
What types of evidence can show bad character?
Bad character may be shown by previous convictions, cautions, acquittals, agreed facts, or witness evidence of a reputation for reprehensible behaviour.
Can previous acquittals be used as evidence of bad character?
Yes, the prosecution can assert that the defendant committed the offence(s) of which they were previously acquitted.
What does s.98 CJA 2003 exclude from bad character evidence?
Evidence of misconduct related to the alleged facts of the offence or misconduct connected with the investigation or prosecution is excluded.
What are the gateways for admissibility of defendant bad character evidence?
There are seven gateways outlined in s.101(1)(a-g) CJA 2003 through which evidence of a defendant’s bad character can be admissible.
What is the mnemonic to remember the gateways for defendant bad character evidence?
Agreement, Blurting it out, Context, Done it before, ‘E did it, False impression, Gets at the witness.
What is the first gateway for admissibility of bad character evidence?
Section 101(1)(a): Agreement of the parties allows evidence if all parties agree to its admissibility.
What does Section 101(1)(b) allow?
It allows defendants to introduce evidence of their own bad character without needing court leave.
What is ‘important explanatory evidence’ as per s.101(1)(c)?
Evidence that is crucial for understanding other evidence in the case and is substantial in value.
What does Section 101(1)(d) pertain to?
It relates to evidence that is relevant to an important matter in issue between the defendant and the prosecution.
What is the significance of R v Hanson in relation to propensity?
It establishes that evidence of bad character can show a propensity to commit offences of the kind charged.
What is the difference between propensity to be untruthful and propensity to be dishonest?
Propensity to be untruthful is shown through previous convictions where the defendant was disbelieved, while dishonesty does not imply untruthfulness.
What is the function of the judge regarding bad character evidence?
The judge determines whether evidence is capable of establishing a propensity.
What is Section 101(1)(e) about?
It pertains to evidence that has substantial probative value in relation to an important matter in issue between the defendant and a co-defendant.
When is evidence of a defendant’s propensity to be untruthful admissible under section 101(1)(e)?
It is admissible only if the nature or conduct of the defendant’s defence undermines the co-defendant’s defence.
What types of evidence are admissible under section 101(1)(e)?
Only evidence adduced by the co-defendant or evidence a witness is invited to give in cross-examination by the co-defendant.
Does the fairness test in s. 101(3) CJA 2003 apply to s.101(1)(e)?
No, the fairness test does not apply to s.101(1)(e).
Can a defendant exclude evidence of their bad character if it is a co-defendant seeking to adduce it?
It is very hard for a defendant to exclude such evidence.
When does evidence of a co-defendant’s propensity become admissible?
When one defendant asserts they have no such propensity, the other can adduce evidence of that propensity.
What is required to admit evidence under section 101(1)(f)?
Leave of the court is required to admit evidence through this gateway.
What constitutes a false impression under section 101(1)(f)?
A false impression is an express or implied assertion made by the defendant that misleads the court or jury.
How is a defendant treated as responsible for making an assertion?
If the assertion is made by the defendant, a witness called by the defendant, or in response to a question intended to elicit it.
What is the limitation on evidence admissible under section 101(1)(f)?
Evidence is admissible only if it goes no further than necessary to correct the false impression.
What is section 101(1)(g) about?
It allows evidence when the defendant has made an attack on another person’s character.
What actions constitute an attack on another person’s character under section 101(1)(g)?
Adducing evidence attacking the other person’s character, asking questions in cross-examination intended to elicit such evidence, or making an imputation about the other person.
What types of evidence are admissible under section 101(1)(g)?
Only prosecution evidence is admissible under this section.
