MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS
ANSWERS
Bar Professional
Question 1
Mark is arrested for an offence of theft. It is alleged that he stole a charity box from a newsagent
in Neverland. He is arrested and taken to the police station where he denies the offence. When
he is at home later on his mother asks him, “Mark, tell me the truth, did you take that charity
box? Mark answers, “Maybe.” As to whether or not this answer amounts to a confession, which
ONE of the following answers is CORRECT?
[A] This answer does not amount to a confession because it is equivocal.
[B] This answer does amount to a confession because it is partly adverse to Mark.
[C] This answer does not amount to a confession because it has not been made to a person in
authority.
[D] This answer does amount to a confession because it is an unequivocal acceptance of guilt.
[B] is the correct answer. This answer does amount to a confession because it is partly adverse
to Mark. Section 82 PACE defines a confession as including any statement wholly or partly
adverse to the person who made it, whether made to a person in authority or not and whether
made in words or otherwise. The answer “maybe” is equivocal, but it is clearly partly adverse
to Mark.
P a g e 1 | 20
,Question 2
Ben is arrested for burglary. At the police station Ben confesses to the offence during his
interview. However, he seeks to exclude his confession at trial under the provisions of s.76(2)
PACE on the basis that prior to the interview he was told that if he did not confess he would not
be granted bail, that he only confessed due to this threat and, thus, that his confession is
unreliable. Ben was granted police bail following the interview. Regarding the burden and
standard of proof in these circumstances, which ONE of the following propositions is
CORRECT?
[A] The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the confession was not so obtained.
[B] The defence must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the confession was so obtained.
[C] The prosecution must prove on the balance of probabilities that the confession was not so
obtained.
[D] The defence must prove on the balance of probabilities that the confession was so obtained.
[A] is the correct answer. The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the
confession was not so obtained. Section 76(2)(b) PACE provides: (2) If, in any proceedings
where the prosecution proposes to give in evidence a confession made by an accused person,
it is represented to the court that the confession was or may have been obtained— ... (b) in
consequence of anything said or done which was likely, in the circumstances existing at the
time, to render unreliable any confession which might be made by him in consequence thereof,
the court shall not allow the confession to be given in evidence against him except in so far as
the prosecution proves to the court beyond reasonable doubt that the confession
(notwithstanding that it may be true) was not obtained as aforesaid.
P a g e 2 | 20
, Question 3
Joy is charged with arson. She admitted in interview that she had set fire to her council flat
because she wanted to be rehoused. Her confession is the main evidence against her and the
prosecution propose to rely on it. At trial in the Crown Court no application is made to exclude
the confession, albeit the Defence Statement deals with this issue by asserting that even though
she confessed to the offence she only did so out of confusion and distress. Before the trial
starts, the judge notices that Joy does appear to be extremely confused, distressed and
vulnerable. The judge also notes that, despite Joy’s obvious vulnerability, no appropriate adult
was with her during the interview. In these circumstances, the judge is concerned about the
reliability of the confession and raises this with both defence and prosecution counsel.
Notwithstanding the judge’s intervention, defence counsel does not apply to exclude the
confession. In these circumstances, which ONE of the following propositions MOST
APPROPRIATELY describes what the judge should do next?
[A] The judge should require the prosecution to prove that the confession was not obtained in
consequence of anything said or done which was likely, in the circumstances existing at the time,
to render any confession unreliable.
[B] The judge should require the defence to apply to exclude the confession on the basis it was
obtained in consequence of anything said or done which was likely, in the circumstances existing
at the time, to render any confession unreliable.
[C] The judge should ask the prosecution to review the evidence to ensure it is satisfied that the
confession is reliable.
[D] The judge should ask the prosecution and defence to review the evidence to ensure that both
are satisfied that the confession is reliable before the trial commences.
[A] most appropriately describes what the judge should do next. The judge should require the
prosecution to prove that the confession was not obtained in consequence of anything said or
done which was likely, in the circumstances existing at the time, to render any confession
unreliable. By section 76(3) PACE where the prosecution proposes to give in evidence a
confession made by an accused person, the court may of its own motion require the
prosecution, as a condition of allowing it to do so, to prove that the confession was not obtained
as mentioned in [S.76(2)]. Here the defence have declined to make an application and the judge
has observed the defendant’s obvious vulnerability, so it is appropriate for the judge to
intervene at this stage. It is not simply a matter of leaving it to the prosecution or both the
prosecution and defence to satisfy themselves that the confession is reliable.
P a g e 3 | 20
ANSWERS
Bar Professional
Question 1
Mark is arrested for an offence of theft. It is alleged that he stole a charity box from a newsagent
in Neverland. He is arrested and taken to the police station where he denies the offence. When
he is at home later on his mother asks him, “Mark, tell me the truth, did you take that charity
box? Mark answers, “Maybe.” As to whether or not this answer amounts to a confession, which
ONE of the following answers is CORRECT?
[A] This answer does not amount to a confession because it is equivocal.
[B] This answer does amount to a confession because it is partly adverse to Mark.
[C] This answer does not amount to a confession because it has not been made to a person in
authority.
[D] This answer does amount to a confession because it is an unequivocal acceptance of guilt.
[B] is the correct answer. This answer does amount to a confession because it is partly adverse
to Mark. Section 82 PACE defines a confession as including any statement wholly or partly
adverse to the person who made it, whether made to a person in authority or not and whether
made in words or otherwise. The answer “maybe” is equivocal, but it is clearly partly adverse
to Mark.
P a g e 1 | 20
,Question 2
Ben is arrested for burglary. At the police station Ben confesses to the offence during his
interview. However, he seeks to exclude his confession at trial under the provisions of s.76(2)
PACE on the basis that prior to the interview he was told that if he did not confess he would not
be granted bail, that he only confessed due to this threat and, thus, that his confession is
unreliable. Ben was granted police bail following the interview. Regarding the burden and
standard of proof in these circumstances, which ONE of the following propositions is
CORRECT?
[A] The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the confession was not so obtained.
[B] The defence must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the confession was so obtained.
[C] The prosecution must prove on the balance of probabilities that the confession was not so
obtained.
[D] The defence must prove on the balance of probabilities that the confession was so obtained.
[A] is the correct answer. The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the
confession was not so obtained. Section 76(2)(b) PACE provides: (2) If, in any proceedings
where the prosecution proposes to give in evidence a confession made by an accused person,
it is represented to the court that the confession was or may have been obtained— ... (b) in
consequence of anything said or done which was likely, in the circumstances existing at the
time, to render unreliable any confession which might be made by him in consequence thereof,
the court shall not allow the confession to be given in evidence against him except in so far as
the prosecution proves to the court beyond reasonable doubt that the confession
(notwithstanding that it may be true) was not obtained as aforesaid.
P a g e 2 | 20
, Question 3
Joy is charged with arson. She admitted in interview that she had set fire to her council flat
because she wanted to be rehoused. Her confession is the main evidence against her and the
prosecution propose to rely on it. At trial in the Crown Court no application is made to exclude
the confession, albeit the Defence Statement deals with this issue by asserting that even though
she confessed to the offence she only did so out of confusion and distress. Before the trial
starts, the judge notices that Joy does appear to be extremely confused, distressed and
vulnerable. The judge also notes that, despite Joy’s obvious vulnerability, no appropriate adult
was with her during the interview. In these circumstances, the judge is concerned about the
reliability of the confession and raises this with both defence and prosecution counsel.
Notwithstanding the judge’s intervention, defence counsel does not apply to exclude the
confession. In these circumstances, which ONE of the following propositions MOST
APPROPRIATELY describes what the judge should do next?
[A] The judge should require the prosecution to prove that the confession was not obtained in
consequence of anything said or done which was likely, in the circumstances existing at the time,
to render any confession unreliable.
[B] The judge should require the defence to apply to exclude the confession on the basis it was
obtained in consequence of anything said or done which was likely, in the circumstances existing
at the time, to render any confession unreliable.
[C] The judge should ask the prosecution to review the evidence to ensure it is satisfied that the
confession is reliable.
[D] The judge should ask the prosecution and defence to review the evidence to ensure that both
are satisfied that the confession is reliable before the trial commences.
[A] most appropriately describes what the judge should do next. The judge should require the
prosecution to prove that the confession was not obtained in consequence of anything said or
done which was likely, in the circumstances existing at the time, to render any confession
unreliable. By section 76(3) PACE where the prosecution proposes to give in evidence a
confession made by an accused person, the court may of its own motion require the
prosecution, as a condition of allowing it to do so, to prove that the confession was not obtained
as mentioned in [S.76(2)]. Here the defence have declined to make an application and the judge
has observed the defendant’s obvious vulnerability, so it is appropriate for the judge to
intervene at this stage. It is not simply a matter of leaving it to the prosecution or both the
prosecution and defence to satisfy themselves that the confession is reliable.
P a g e 3 | 20
