You are not logged in to Prodigits. Please register or login.

Subject: Bad character evidence
Replies: 24 Views: 1031

vampboy 17.11.20 - 02:35pm
I am doing an interesting topic on Evidence law and there are some very controversial areas within the field that I'd like to hear your opinion on. Should prior convictions act as admissible evidence for prosecution to adduce against a defendant?

What if it wasn't a criminal offence, but rather just a reprehensible act that is condemned by society; surely that could be bad character evidence.
Do you think judges should allow such admission?
* +

gt_tdi 17.11.20 - 02:38pm
Do your own homework, Shirley. * +

vampboy 17.11.20 - 02:43pm
Wrong case. Edited. * +

vampboy 17.11.20 - 02:49pm
So here are two interesting cases to illustrate how the courts would allow evidence of bad character in the courtroom. In the case of R V Smith; literally called the Brides in bath case, you had a man who was already married yet bigamously marries another person. He manages to convince his first wife to make him the beneficiary in the will then while they were on holiday somewhere, she mysteriously drowned in the bath tub. Ruled as being an incident of epilepsy.



Here's the interesting part; there was actually evidence of two of his previous brides who died under similar circumstances! but bringing that in the court would be bringing evidence of the person's bad character, but the court actually admitted that evidence and he was later convicted.
* +

vampboy 17.11.20 - 02:53pm
Contrast this case with the case of R v Noor Mohd. Another eerie case revolving around a man charged for murder of his wife from cyanide poisoning. There was later evidence found that his ex wife also died from similar circumstances, yet the court did not admit this evidence citing that there wasn't any that he actually poisoned his wife.

So which of these two cases do you think took the rational decision? We now have the criminal justice act 2003 that regulates the issues of bad characters; wherein judge made law is effectively abolished for bad character evidence, so what you say if you were the judge? To what degree should prior convictions be admissible evidence?

Do note that I am not disputing the use of prior offences during commencement of sentencing, I am talking about evidence being accepted in the court in first place,

* +

vampboy 17.11.20 - 02:54pm

I would get a ZERO if you helped me on my homework. * +

gt_tdi 17.11.20 - 02:58pm

Well that's clearly not true, is it? * +

piggle 17.11.20 - 02:58pm
Should be selectively disclosed information * +

+ go to page 1-4
+ my page
+ functions
3 search
4 submit a reply
7 last page
+ bookmark
8 General Chat Forum
9 Forum Index

Custom Search