IInferences Flashcards
What inference may be drawn from a lie?
evidence in support of guilt
indicates consciousness of some kind of guiltW
When should a Lucas direction be given?
whenever a relief upon as evidence of guilt - jury should be reminded that people sometimes lie for a variety of reasons
Where is a Lucas direction not required
where only logical conclusion is guilt
explanation has been offered by the accused and dealt with fairly in summing up
In what 4 circs are Lucas directions likely needed?
- where Defence is alibi
- where judge considers it desirable for suggest jury look for corrob evidence
- where prosecution seek to show something said in or out of court was a lie
- where judge envisages there is real danger prosecution may seek to show something is a lie
What 2 points should be included in a Lucas direction
lie must be admitted/proved beyond reasonable doubt
mere fact of lie is not evidence of the guilt - be sure D did not lie for an innocent reason
What are general principles of the right to silence?
D has right not to incriminate themselves
not compellable at trial
need not assist police with inquiries generally
What are the 4 sections of CJPOA 1994 which enable court to draw adverse inference
S34 - failure to reveal facts relied upon
s35 - silence at trial
s36 - silence on objects/marks
s37 - silence on location
What are the key requirements of s34
before charge - under caution
whilst being questioned
fails to mention fact
D could reasonably have been expected to mention
it
later relied upon for defence
How is adverse inference handled to be compatible with right to a fair trial
direction by judge should be given to jury as to how to handle inference
where right to legal advice withheld (even lawfully) cannot draw - unless waived voluntarily and informed
Can a person be convicted based solely on ANY adverse inference
No - must be other evidence
will not proceed beyond prep in absence of this
what facts are ‘relied upon’
more than just bare denial
anything advance by witness testimony or put as positive case in XX
where reliance on facts is found - what must judge ensure is clear to jury?
the specific failure to mention that fact when asked.
should be discussed with counsel before closing remarks to jury on direction
How should facts put forward in a prepared statement be treated?
cannot be said there was a failure to mention those facts
inconsistencies do not nec amount to reliance on unmentioned facts - judge to be careful
What is key qual for s34 inferences as opposed to s35-8
can be drawn from point of caution - no arrest or charge needed yet
What should be considered when considering whether to draw inference from facts that should have been mentioned?
any reason for not mentioning them
taking into account reasonablness of failure to do so - age, experience, MH, health, sobreity, tiredness, personality