Law of Evidence and Proof Flashcards
Woolmington principle: presumption of innocence
The fundamental principle in criminal law. Establishes that the burden of proof lies clearly with the prosecution in relation to all of the elements of the offence.
The fact that the prosecution bears the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean that the defence do no need to put forward a case; in some cases the defence have a practical obligation, evidential burden, or the burden of proof may be reversed.
Practical obligation in the defence
If the prosecution proves facts which can eb concluded that the defendant committed the act with the requisite mental element, the defence must produce evidence if they want to suggest this evidence is wrong. This is not a burden of proof, it is simply a practical obligation that suggests a reasonable doubt about the conclusions one would otherwise draw from the prosecution case.
“Evidential burden” on defence overview:
The defendant may wish to introduce a defence; the prosecution is under no obligation to negate all possible defences.
This is not just a “practical obligation”; there is an “evidential burden” on this.
Having an evidential burden means that a defence cannot be left to the judge/jury unless it has been made a “live issue” by the defence - then the prosecution must destroy the defence. Burden of proof remains on the prosecution.
Three ways in which exceptions to the Woolmington Principle exist:
- the defence of insanity is claimed
- can also be overridden by Parliament by express statutory exemptions e.g. s202A(4)(b) CA
- In occasions when the Evidence Act 2006 places burden of proving a particular issue on one party in relation to the admissability of evidence, e.g. identification evidene
Situations where the Woolmington Principle may not apply:
“Public welfare regulatory offences”
offences that regulate everyday conduct having a tendency to endanger the public or sections of the public.
For these, once the prosecution has proved the actus reus thre is no need to prove mens rea; burden of proof passes to the defendant to prove absence of fault.
These are “strictly liability” offences.
Discharging burden of proof
Any party bearing a legal burden of proof must discharge this burden to the standard required.
prosecution must discharge to “beyond a reasonable doubt”
Defence need only to prove on the “balance of probabilities”
“Beyond a reasonable doubt” definition/is
“an honest and reasonable uncertainty left in your mind about the guilt of the defendant after you have given careful and impartial consideration of all evidence”
Direction for applying beyond a reasonable doubt
Starting point is the presumption of innocence.
Treat the accused as innocent until the Crown has proved guilt.
crown must prove guilty beyond a reasonable doubt
What is reasonable doubt?
an honest and reasonable uncertainty left in your mind about the guilt of the accused after you have given careful and impartial consideration of the evidence.
What is the balance of probabilities?
Where the defence is required to prove a particular element, on the balance of probabilities, it must simply show that it is more probably than not.
