This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more

BPTC Law Notes Criminal Evidence Notes

Preliminary Evidential Matters Notes

Updated Preliminary Evidential Matters Notes

Criminal Evidence Notes

Criminal Evidence

Approximately 176 pages

A collection of the best BPTC notes the director of Oxbridge Notes (an Oxford law graduate) could find after combing through twenty-four samples from outstanding students with the highest results in England and carefully evaluating each on accuracy, formatting, logical structure, spelling/grammar, conciseness and "wow-factor".

These notes were prepared in a highly visual style, using flow-charts, questions and answer boxes, miniature mind maps and more. Highly concise, these notes pack more i...

The following is a more accessible plain text extract of the PDF sample above, taken from our Criminal Evidence Notes. Due to the challenges of extracting text from PDFs, it will have odd formatting:

Syllabus 10: Preliminary Evidential Matters

General Principles of Evidence in Criminal Cases

  1. Facts in Issue

Facts that remain contentious, and must be (dis)proven normally by the prosecution (exceptionally by D)

  • Thus, nature of the facts in issue is determined by the legal ingredients of the offence/defence

Sims [1946] KB 531, per Lord Goddard CJ at p. 539: ‘[W]henever there is a plea of not guilty, everything is in issue and the prosecution have to prove the whole of their case…’

Criminal Justice Act 1967, s.10: any fact formally admitted under s.10 ceases to be in issue

  1. Formal Admissions

Governed by Criminal Justice Act 1967, s 10

  • CrimPR, rr. 37.6 (magistrates' court) and 38.13 (Crown Court): where fact is formally admitted, a written record of the admission must be made, unless court directs otherwise

Pittard [2006] EWCA Crim 2028: Written admissions must ordinarily be put before the jury so long as they are relevant and do not contain material that should not go to the jury

  • s.10(2)(b) and (d), and Lewis [1989] Crim LR 61: formal admission may be made in court orally

Key principle: clarity on what has been admitted

  • eg. Lewis (1971) 55 Cr App R 386: even though opposing counsel formally admitted to all the facts in P’s opening speech, court added that such a procedure should be adopted only rarely and with caution, because jurors, when considering the opening speech, might find it difficult to distinguish between law, mixed fact and law, and comment

s.10(1): a formal admission may be made of ‘any fact of which oral evidence may be given in any criminal proceedings’

  • s.10 cannot be used to admit what would otherwise fall to be excluded, eg. hearsay

  • Naylor [2010] EWCA Crim 1188: expert opinion is technically not a fact, and therefore cannot be admitted through s.10

    • However, a party who accepts another party's expert's conclusions may admit them as fact under s. 10 (CrimPR, r. 33.3)

Formal admissions should not be made lightly

  • Kolton [2000] Crim LR 761: can only be withdrawn under s.10(4) if there exists cogent evidence from the accused and those advising him that the admissions were made by reason of mistake or misunderstanding

  1. Relevance

Cardinal rule of evidence: all evidence which is sufficiently relevant to the facts in issue is admissible

  • Exception: where no reasonable jury, properly directed as to its defects, could place any weight on it (Robinson [2006] 1 Cr App R 221, a case concerning voice recognition evidence)

  • Strict liability offences: evidence of motive, intention or knowledge is inadmissible, being irrelevant to what the Crown has to prove and merely prejudicial to the accused (Sandhu [1997] Crim LR 288; Byrne [2002] 2 Cr App R 311)

Classic formulation in Article 1 of Stephen’s Digest of the Law of Evidence: relevance signifies that ‘any two facts to which it is applied are so related to each other that according to the common course of events one either taken by itself or in connection with other facts proves or renders probable the past, present or future existence or non-existence of the other’

  • DPP v Kilbourne [1973] AC 729, per Lord Simon at p. 756: ‘relevant evidence is evidence which makes the matter which requires proof more or less probable’

  • Randall [2004] 1 All ER 467, per Lord Steyn at [20]: question of relevance is typically a matter of degree to be determined, for the most part, by common sense and experience

Evidence of good character of P’s witness is generally inadmissible to bolster credibility, except where it is relevant to an issue in the case, e.g.:

  • Amado-Taylor [2001] EWCA Crim 1898: in a case of rape, the defence being consent, evidence of the complainant's disposition to resist any form of pre-marital sexual intimacy

  • Lodge [2013] EWCA Crim 987: in a case of inflicting grievous bodily harm, the defence being self-defence accompanied by evidence that the complainant had started the violence making racially abusive comments, evidence to show that the complainant was not a racist

  • Refer Blackstone’s Criminal Practice F 1.12 - 1.17 for further eg. of relevance in certain issues

  1. Circumstantial Evidence

Circumstantial evidence = evidence of relevant facts, i.e. facts from which the existence or non-existence of facts in issue may be inferred

  • Contrast with direct evidence = evidence of fact in issue; in testimonial evidence, it is evidence about facts in issue of which the witness claims to have personal knowledge

Works on cumulative effect: DPP v Kilbourne [1973] AC 729 per Lord Simon at p. 758; Exall (1866) 4 F & F 922, per Pollock CB at p. 929

Note the strict approach to determining guilt based on circumstantial evidence, since the guilt is determined based on inference alone and evidence may be fabricated to cast suspicion on another

  • Teper v The Queen [1952] AC 480, per Lord Normand at p. 489: ‘It is also necessary before drawing the inference of the accused's guilt from circumstantial evidence to be sure that there are no other co-existing circumstances which would weaken or destroy the inference.’

    • McGreevy v DPP [1973] 1 All ER 503: But where P’s case is based solely on circumstantial evidence, no requirement for judge to direct jury to acquit unless they are sure that the facts proved are not only consistent with guilt but also inconsistent with any other reasonable conclusion

  1. Real Evidence

A material object, of which the condition, value or existence is in issue or relevant to an issue

  • This object is produced in court for inspection by the tribunal...

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our Criminal Evidence Notes.