Evidence III (bad character evidence) Flashcards
What is the general rule on bad character evidence?
It is inadmissible
What is bad character evidence? What 2 things does it not include?
Evidence of (a disposition towards) misconduct except for evidence which…
- Is related to alleged facts of the offence; or
- Is in connection with investigation/prosecution of offence
What is misconduct?
The word from the definition of bad character evidence
The commission of an offence/other reprehensible behaviour
Reprehensible behaviour not defined but case law says ‘reprehensible’ = some degree of moral blameworthiness e.g. racism, bullying, work misconduct, parent who has child taken into care
Will all morally wrong behaviour be reprehensible?
No e.g. having an affair will not be considered bad character evidence in law, but membership of a gang will
What are common sources of bad character evidence?
- Previous convictions in UK
- Cautions
- Acquittals where prosecution contends that D was guilty of that offence
- Agreed facts amounting to reprehensible behaviour
- Witness evidence of a reputation for reprehensible behaviour
Where prosecution relies on evidence of previous acquittals, will this not infringe on double jeopardy rule?
Not if they do not seek to have D punished for previous offences i.e. can assert D did commit offence of which D was previously convicted
Z [2000] - rape case in which it was permissible for prosecution to rely on four previous rape allegations where same defence was advanced and three had resulted in acquittals; showed Z had propensity to rape and assert consensual intercourse had taken place
What falls under ‘has to do with alleged facts of offence’ and ‘in connection with investigation or prosecution’? What is the effect of these falling outside of s98 definition?
The conduct falling outside of s98 bad character evidence definition (and is therefore admissible)
- Alleged facts = evidence of motive of accused to commit offence has to do with alleged facts
- In connection with = jury tampering, witness intimidation etc.
As they fall outside the definition, they are automatically admissibe (without going through gateway)
If D tells demonstrable lie during interview, subject to relevance, that is not a matter which would require the prosecution to make a bad character application by virtue of s.98(b)
When is bad character evidence admissible? After it is admitted, what can it be used for?
- Only admissible if it falls within one of the gateways
- Once admitted, can be used for any purpose for which it is relevant
What are the 7 gateaways for admissibility of defendant bad character evidence under s101(1)?
- Agreement of the party
- Evidence adduced by D
- Important explanatory evidence
- Relevant to an important matter in issue between D and prosecution
- Relevant to matter in in issue between D and co-D
- Correcting a false impression
- Attack on another person’s character
Pnemonics:
1. Agreement
2. Blurts it out
3. Context
4. Done it before
5. ‘E’ did it
6. False impression
7. Gets at witness
What can bad character evidence not be used for?
Bolstering a weak case or prejudicing a jury against D
S101(1) GATEWAYS
If bad character admitted through agreement of parties s101(1)(a), what is not needed?
An application to court for leave to adduce evidence or formal recording of agreement (tacit agreement enought)
S101(1) GATEWAYS
What is permitted by evidence adduced by D s101(1)(b) and what is the rationale here?
- Allows D to introduce evidence of own bad character
- Rationale = come clean about old conviction, show bias against him from police, put forward defence (e.g. in prison at time)
S101(1) GATEWAYS
What type of evidence is permitted by important explanatory evidence s101(1)(c) and what is required for this gateway?
- Prosecution can adduce evidence of past misconduct of D where needed to explain prosecution case in current trial
- Leave of court required
E.g. to show previous relationship between people involved in trial (impossible to understand narrative of prosecution without)
S101(1) GATEWAYS
For relevant to an important matter in issue between D and prosecution s101(1)(d), what is required and what is the only evidence admissible?
- Leave of court required
- Only prosecution evidence admissible under this gateway
S101(1) GATEWAYS
What do matters in issue between D and prosecution include under s101(1)(d)? When will these not be matters in issue?
Per s103(1)
- Whether D has propensity to commit offences of the kind he is charged with (except where having propensity makes guilt no more likely)
- Whether D has propensity to be untruthful (except where not suggested D’s case is untruthful in any respect)
S101(1) GATEWAYS
With what evidence is ‘propensity to commit offences of kind he is charged with’ established under s101(1)(d)? Unless what?
With evidence he has been convicted of offence of same description/category as one he is now charged with unless court deems length of time since conviction too long
S101(1) GATEWAYS
What should be considered for ‘propensity to commit offences of kind he is charged with’ under s101(1)(d)?
R v Hanson + extra principles
- Does history of convictions establish propensity to commit offences of the kind charge?
- If so, does the propensity make it more likely that D committed the crime charged?
- Would it be unjust to rely on previous offences?
- The strength of prosecution case (unlikely to be just to admit where little-no evidence against D)
- Number of previous convictions (no minimum but fewer = weaker evidence of propensity)
S101(1) GATEWAYS
Can a ‘propensity to commit offences of kind he is charged with’ under s101(1)(d) only be established before the offence?
No - can be established after the offence e.g. propensity to be involved in racist murder shown by expression by accused of racist beliefs after commission of offence
S101(1) GATEWAYS
When are previous convictions likely to be capable of showing a ‘propensity to be untruthful’ under s101(1)(d)?
I.e. the only time
See example
Where…
- There was a plea of not guilty to previous offence and D gave evidence at trial which jury must have disbelieved; or
- The way the offence was committed involved being untruthful e.g. fraud by false representation
S101(1) GATEWAYS
What should the propensity to be untruthful under s101(1)(d) not be considered the same as? Why is this important?
- The propensity to be dishonest
- Important because e.g. while burglary is categorised as a dishonesty offence, a person can commit a burglary and go onto admit it in interview and plead guilty = would be incorrect to describe their behaviour as general untruthful
S101(1) GATEWAYS
What issue other than propensity (to commit offences of kind charged with/to be untruthful) will be considered under s101(1)(d)?
Identity - to support case of identification where facts of previous convictions are so unusual as to constitute a ‘signature’ of the offender’s mode of offending
E.g. Straffen
* Trial for murdering a young girl by strangulation - evidence was adduced that the D had previously been convicted of two similar offences - all three offences had the unusual feature that there had been no attempt at sexual assault and no attempt to conceal the body
* In that case the only additional evidence against the defendant was that he was in the area and he had recently been released from Broadmoor secure psychiatric hospital.
* In such a case it is not necessary for the judge to give the usual warning not to convict solely or mainly on evidence of bad character.
S101(1) GATEWAYS
When can court not admit evidence under s101(1)(d) or (g) because of s101(3) rule? What must D do?
Where it would have such an adverse effect on fairness of proceedings (D must apply) - the ‘fairness test’
THIS IS NOT THE SAME AS S78
S101(1) GATEWAYS
Where D faces multiple charges in the same proceedings, why is a gateway needed to allow cross-admissibility of one offence as evidence of the other? Why is s101(1)(d) important here?
- Because bad character provisions apply as if each offence was charged in separate proceedings
- S101(1)(d) is the most likely gateway to fulfil this function
E.g. man accused of sexual assault on both stepdaughters (A and B)
- Evidence from A that she was assaulted is only evidence that the defendant committed offences against her unless it is admissible through gateway (d) to show a propensity to commit offences of the kind alleged (in which case it also becomes evidence against the defendant when the jury are considering the allegations made by B; vice versa)
In such a case, if…
- a jury were sure that the defendant was guilty in respect of A and
- they were further sure that that conviction established a propensity to offend in a manner relevant to B’s case,
the evidence can be lawfully deployed in that way
S101(1) GATEWAYS
What are the functions of the judge and jury under s101(1)(d)?
- Judge - determines whether evidence capable of establishing propensity
- Jury - decides whether it actually does show propensity