CLP 5 - Trial* Flashcards
What is a Legal Burden as opposed to an Evidential Burden?
Requirement to prove an element of your case to the prescribed standard
- Legal burden - standard for prosecution ‘beyond all reasonable doubt’ // standard for the defence ‘balance of probabilities’
What is an Evidential Burden as opposed to a Legal Burden?
Have to raise some evidence to satisfy the judge that the matter should be argued before the jury
Burden of proof in relation to duress
If sufficient evidence is raised to leave it as a live issue it is the prosecution who must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
Burden of proof in relation to alibi
The Judge must direct the jury that although the defence have raised the defence, it is not a matter for them to prove.
The prosecution retain the burden of disproving the alibi beyond a reasonable doubt.
When do the defence have the legal burden? Name 4
- Insanity
- Diminished responsibility
- Automatism
- Loss of control
(DIAL)
When should a Turnbull direction be given?
- The Defendant disputes the identification evidence; and
- The case against the accused depends ‘wholly or substantially’ on the correctness of the visual identification.
NB: also applies in cases of alleged recognition.
What should the judge warn the jury of whenever the prosecution case against an accused depends wholly or substantially on the correctness of the IDs of the accused, and when D alleges the ID to be mistaken?
Of the special need for CAUTION before convicting the accused in reliance on the correctness of the identification
What are the elements of the special Turnbull warning?
The judge should:
- instruct the jury as to the reason for the need for such a warning.
- explain mistaken witnesses can be convincing - direct the jury to examine the circumstances in which the identification by each witness came to be made.
- remind the jury of any specific weaknesses in the identification evidence.
What else will the judge direct the jury to consider if there is any other evidence to support the correctness of the identification?
- Should identify to the jury the evidence capable of supporting the evidence of identification.
- Should say if there is any evidence or circumstances which the jury might consider to be supporting when it did not have this quality.
What if the ID evidence is poor and unsupported? Can the judge do anything after the prosecution case closes?
Judges are required to examine the state of identification evidence at the close of the prosecution case
AND
to stop the case if it is poor and unsupported
What are the considerations for the judge in a Turnbull style case?
- What is the quality of the identification?
- Is there other evidence to support the correctness of the identification?
What if the judge considers the visual identification in a Turnbull case to be poor?
- If there is no supporting evidence, the judge should withdraw the case from the jury and direct an acquittal.
- If there is supporting evidence, the judge can leave the jury to assess the weak identification.
What Turnbull factors assist with considering strengths & weaknesses of a case?
A - amount of time under observation
D - distance
V - visibility
O - obstruction
K - known or seen before
A - any reason to remember
T - time lapse
E - error or material discrepancy
Is dock identification allowed?
Trial judge retains a discretion to permit a dock identification.
In considering this, the judge will need to consider whether such a course of conduct will jeopardise the fairness of the accused’s trial.
What are the four key aspects to making an application to exclude a confession?
- Advance notification
- Timing
- Voir dire
- Submissions
Advance notification - standard case preparation time limits in a magistrates’ court
- Defence skeleton argument in support at least 10 business days before trial
- The prosecution response 5 business days after that
At what point in proceedings can an application to exclude a confession be made?
Crown Court:
- pre-trial hearing listed specifically for this purpose, OR
- just prior to opening the case to the jury (and in absence of jury).
MC:
- s 76 in MC should be dealt with as a preliminary issue.
Who hears the evidence in a Voir dire? What must be proven?
The judge:
Under 76(2) the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the confession was not obtained by:
(a) oppression; and/or
(b) by anything said or done which was likely in the circumstances to render any confession unreliable.
Who can call their evidence in a Voir dire?
The prosecution must,
the defence can
Is the defendant present during a Voir dire?
Yes
Is the Jury present during a Voir dire?
No in the crown court (the judge may well be the same in the magistrates’ court)
What if the judge fails to resolve disputed facts on a voir dire before ruling on the admissibility of a confession?
Even where not specifically invited to do so, any resulting conviction is likely to be QUASHED