Corroboration Flashcards
What is corroboration?
Independent evidence that supports a witness’s testimony and implicates the accused in a material way.
What are the two key requirements for corroboration?
- Independence
- Implicates the accused in the crime
Which case provides the classic definition of corroboration?
R v Baskerville [1916]
What did Baskerville define as corroboration?
Independent evidence that confirms both the crime and that the accused committed it.
Can a witness corroborate themselves?
No. Corroboration must come from an independent source.
(DPP v Christie [1914])
What is the significance of DPP v PC [2002] regarding corroboration?
It ruled that the complainant’s own description of the room was self-corroboration and invalid.
What does it mean for evidence to ‘implicate the accused’?
It must make it more probable that the accused committed the crime.
What happens if evidence is equally consistent with guilt and innocence?
It does not amount to corroboration.
What case showed that proving intercourse is not enough to corroborate rape?
R v James (1971)
What is a ‘material particular’ in corroboration?
A fact that is significant to proving guilt or innocence.
(DPP v Murphy [2005])
Can multiple weak pieces of evidence together amount to corroboration?
Yes, this is called cumulative corroboration.
(R v McNamara (1981))
In DPP v Reid (1993), what factors combined to provide corroboration?
Medical findings, loud TV volume, victim’s distress, and the accused’s statements.
Is accomplice testimony enough for conviction?
Yes, but a mandatory warning must be given about the risk.
(Dental Board v O’Callaghan)
How did Cosgrave v DPP (2012) describe accomplice evidence?
As inherently unreliable due to the accomplice’s compromised character.
Does a slight degree of complicity make someone an accomplice?
Yes, even minor involvement triggers the corroboration warning.
(People v Carney [1955])
Are accessories after the fact considered accomplices?
Yes, as ruled in DPP v Diemling (1992).
Why is evidence from Witness Protection Programme members risky?
They may lie due to the significant benefits they receive.
What did DPP v Gilligan (2003) say about witness protection witnesses?
Their evidence is admissible but requires cautious scrutiny and possible corroboration.
What must judges do when protected witnesses testify?
Give a corroboration warning, similar to that for accomplice evidence.
(DPP v Ryan (2011))
Can a trial court in a non-jury case self-warn about corroboration?
Yes, as long as it is clear from their reasoning that they were aware of the risks.
