Sufficeny and corroboration

Question 1

What is the name for and what are the crucial facts of a case?

Answer 1

facta probanda

• Identification
• Actus Reus
• Mens Rea

Question 2

Which old case shows the need to establish all the crucial facts?

Answer 2

Lockwood v Walker

Question 3

Which case confirms that circumstantial evidence can be sufficient for corroboration?

Answer 3

Fox v HMA - it is about the sufficiency of evidence in its entirety not its individual value.

Question 4

Which case confirmed that video evidence can be used as corroborative evidence?

Answer 4

Gubinas

Question 5

Which case states that if there is one emphatic positive ID there need only be a vague matching description to back it up?

Answer 5

Ralston

Question 6

Which case states that blood evidence can provide strong ID evidence? Need only be supplemented with weak evidence?

Answer 6

Laing

Question 7

Which case states that despite confessions being strong evidence they do still need ‘sufficient independent check’?

Answer 7

Meredith v Lees

Question 8

What is the authority for special knowledge confession?

Answer 8

Manuel v HMA

Question 9

Which case states that it does not matter if the police already had the knowledge and which case states that it does not matter if the public already knew the knowledge?

Answer 9

Wilson v McAughey and Wilson

Question 10

What is the authority on distress corroboration? and what does its say are its limits?

Answer 10

Smith v Lees - Can only corroborate lack of consent not the details of speicifc attacks.

Question 11

Which case tells us that distress must be witnessed not read in a diary?

Answer 11

Walker v HMA

Question 12

Which case states that distress corroboration is less time limited than in the past?

Answer 12

Wilson v HMA

Question 13

How must Moorov case be charged?

Answer 13

They must be live and charged together.

Question 14

What is the modern authority on Moorov?

Answer 14

MR v HMA

Question 15

What similarity requirements did this case set out?

Answer 15

Must be similar in TIME, PLACE AND CIRCUMSTANCE.

Question 16

Which case limits the gap in time to 3.5 years?

Answer 16

Russell

Question 17

Which modern case confirms that time is less strictly applied if there are compelling similarities?

Answer 17

JL v HMA

Question 18

What did MR say about types of crimes corroborating others in Moorov?

Answer 18

Less serious crimes CAN corroborate more serious ones so long as they illustrate a course of conduct.

Question 19

What is the Howden doctrine?

Answer 19

If it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt that two or more offences were committed by the same person then lack of positive identification on one of the charges was not an impediment to conviction. So long as there is corroboration of the accused on one of the incidents.

Question 20

What factors might fall under circumstances in Moorov cases?

Answer 20

Relationship to accused (boss, teacher), age of the victims, sex of the victims etc

Question 21

Which case of distress evidence shows that if you exhibit normal behaviour in the time between your disclosure it will not be accepted?

Answer 21

Moore