MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS
ANSWERS
Bar Professional
Question 1
Jason Davies is charged with common assault. At a pre-trial hearing before a bench of 3
magistrates the prosecution apply to admit the defendant’s previous convictions for assault at
trial to demonstrate that he is a violent man (a bad character application) and Jason’s barrister
seeks to exclude the prosecution evidence on the basis of various breaches of the PACE Codes
of practice. In relation to making rulings at pre-trial hearings, which ONE of the following
propositions is CORRECT?
[A] The magistrates can make a ruling at a pre-trial hearing provided the parties have been given
an opportunity to make representations and it appears to the court to be in the interests of justice
to make the ruling.
[B] The magistrates can make a ruling at a pre-trial hearing provided the parties consent and it
appears to the court to be in the interests of justice to make the ruling.
[C] The magistrates can make a ruling at a pre-trial hearing provided the parties have been given
an opportunity to make representations and there are clear and compelling reasons to make the
ruling before the prosecution case has been heard.
[D] The magistrates can make a ruling at a pre-trial hearing only in exceptional circumstances which
require such a ruling to be made in the interests of justice.
ANSWER
[A] is the correct answer. Section 8A of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 allows for pre-trial hearings
(i.e. before any evidence is called at trial) to take place where the magistrates can make a ruling on the
admissibility of evidence or any other question of law relating to the case. Any ruling at such a hearing
can be made only where the parties have been given an opportunity to make representations and it
appears to the court to be in the interests of justice to make the ruling. It is worth noting that an
unrepresented defendant must be given the opportunity to apply for legal aid before a ruling is made.
P a g e 1 | 33
,Question 2
You are prosecuting Raymond Charles who is charged with ABH. His case has been sent to the
Crown Court for trial. The case against Raymond relies upon 6 eye witness identifications. All
6 witnesses have been asked to attend court on the first day of the trial, one of whom is having
to travel from Australia to attend. The defence are seeking to have the identification evidence
excluded due to various breaches of PACE Code D. You do not agree with the defence argument
and therefore full argument will need to take place on this issue. You recognise that, if the
defence argument succeeds, there will be insufficient evidence remaining for the prosecution
to continue. You attend the Plea and Trial Preparation Hearing and the judge requests the
defence to serve a skeleton argument setting out its case on exclusion of the identification
evidence within 14 days and the prosecution to serve a skeleton argument in response within 7
days thereafter. The judge then asks you when you would like the legal argument to take place.
In these circumstances, the MOST APPROPRIATE response would be:
[A] After your opening speech to the jury.
[B] Immediately at the Plea and trial Preparation Hearing.
[C] At a pre-trial hearing at least 21 days after the Plea and Trial Preparation Hearing.
[D] After the jury has been sworn but before your opening speech.
ANSWER
[C] is the correct answer. This will allow both the defence and you to prepare reasoned arguments in
advance. This is important given that, if the defence succeed, the prosecution case cannot proceed. In
addition, there are 6 prosecution witnesses who need to attend the trial, including one from overseas;
it is clearly in the interests of the prosecution to determine the case at an early stage (before the day of
trial) so as to avoid the need for the witnesses to attend if the prosecution lose the argument.
P a g e 2 | 33
,Question 3
Antonia Berlusconi is charged with driving without due care (a summary only offence) and is
representing herself at summary trial before a bench of 3 magistrates. She has given evidence
and been cross-examined by the prosecution. The Justices’ Clerk asks her if she has any other
evidence that she wishes to rely upon and Antonia says she has not. In these circumstances,
which ONE of the following propositions concerning prosecution closing speeches is
CORRECT?
[A] The prosecution is not entitled to make a closing speech because Antonia is unrepresented and
has introduced no evidence other than giving evidence herself.
[B] The prosecution is not entitled to make a closing speech because Antonia is unrepresented.
[C] The prosecution is entitled to make a closing speech because Antonia has giving evidence
herself in her own defence.
[D] The prosecution is entitled to make a closing speech because Antonia is unrepresented and has
introduced no evidence other than giving evidence herself.
ANSWER
[A] is the correct answer. At summary trial the prosecution are only entitled to make a closing speech
where (i) the defendant is represented, or (ii) whether or not he is represented, the defendant has
introduced evidence other than his own (CrimPR r.24.3(3)(h)). As such, the prosecution cannot make
a closing speech in a case involving an unrepresented defendant who does not rely on any evidence
other than what he says in the witness box himself.
P a g e 3 | 33
, Question 4
Regarding giving reasons for a verdict in the Magistrates’ Court, which ONE of the following
propositions is CORRECT?
[A] The Magistrates must give reasons both for convicting a defendant and acquitting a defendant
following summary trial..
[B] The Magistrates have a discretion whether or not to give reasons both for convicting a defendant
and acquitting a defendant following summary trial..
[C] The Magistrates must give reasons for acquitting a defendant but need not give reasons for
convicting a defendant following summary trial.
[D] The Magistrates must give reasons for convicting a defendant but need not give reasons for
acquitting a defendant following summary trial..
ANSWER
[D] is the correct answer. If the magistrates convict a defendant sufficient reasons must be given to
explain the decision (CrimPR r.24.3(5)). This does not require a detailed judgment; rather it is to ensure
that a defendant should understand why he has been convicted and usually the reasons can be given
in a simple and straightforward manner. Where the defendant is acquitted of the offence, the
magistrates may give reasons for finding the defendant not guilty but are not required to do so.
P a g e 4 | 33
ANSWERS
Bar Professional
Question 1
Jason Davies is charged with common assault. At a pre-trial hearing before a bench of 3
magistrates the prosecution apply to admit the defendant’s previous convictions for assault at
trial to demonstrate that he is a violent man (a bad character application) and Jason’s barrister
seeks to exclude the prosecution evidence on the basis of various breaches of the PACE Codes
of practice. In relation to making rulings at pre-trial hearings, which ONE of the following
propositions is CORRECT?
[A] The magistrates can make a ruling at a pre-trial hearing provided the parties have been given
an opportunity to make representations and it appears to the court to be in the interests of justice
to make the ruling.
[B] The magistrates can make a ruling at a pre-trial hearing provided the parties consent and it
appears to the court to be in the interests of justice to make the ruling.
[C] The magistrates can make a ruling at a pre-trial hearing provided the parties have been given
an opportunity to make representations and there are clear and compelling reasons to make the
ruling before the prosecution case has been heard.
[D] The magistrates can make a ruling at a pre-trial hearing only in exceptional circumstances which
require such a ruling to be made in the interests of justice.
ANSWER
[A] is the correct answer. Section 8A of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 allows for pre-trial hearings
(i.e. before any evidence is called at trial) to take place where the magistrates can make a ruling on the
admissibility of evidence or any other question of law relating to the case. Any ruling at such a hearing
can be made only where the parties have been given an opportunity to make representations and it
appears to the court to be in the interests of justice to make the ruling. It is worth noting that an
unrepresented defendant must be given the opportunity to apply for legal aid before a ruling is made.
P a g e 1 | 33
,Question 2
You are prosecuting Raymond Charles who is charged with ABH. His case has been sent to the
Crown Court for trial. The case against Raymond relies upon 6 eye witness identifications. All
6 witnesses have been asked to attend court on the first day of the trial, one of whom is having
to travel from Australia to attend. The defence are seeking to have the identification evidence
excluded due to various breaches of PACE Code D. You do not agree with the defence argument
and therefore full argument will need to take place on this issue. You recognise that, if the
defence argument succeeds, there will be insufficient evidence remaining for the prosecution
to continue. You attend the Plea and Trial Preparation Hearing and the judge requests the
defence to serve a skeleton argument setting out its case on exclusion of the identification
evidence within 14 days and the prosecution to serve a skeleton argument in response within 7
days thereafter. The judge then asks you when you would like the legal argument to take place.
In these circumstances, the MOST APPROPRIATE response would be:
[A] After your opening speech to the jury.
[B] Immediately at the Plea and trial Preparation Hearing.
[C] At a pre-trial hearing at least 21 days after the Plea and Trial Preparation Hearing.
[D] After the jury has been sworn but before your opening speech.
ANSWER
[C] is the correct answer. This will allow both the defence and you to prepare reasoned arguments in
advance. This is important given that, if the defence succeed, the prosecution case cannot proceed. In
addition, there are 6 prosecution witnesses who need to attend the trial, including one from overseas;
it is clearly in the interests of the prosecution to determine the case at an early stage (before the day of
trial) so as to avoid the need for the witnesses to attend if the prosecution lose the argument.
P a g e 2 | 33
,Question 3
Antonia Berlusconi is charged with driving without due care (a summary only offence) and is
representing herself at summary trial before a bench of 3 magistrates. She has given evidence
and been cross-examined by the prosecution. The Justices’ Clerk asks her if she has any other
evidence that she wishes to rely upon and Antonia says she has not. In these circumstances,
which ONE of the following propositions concerning prosecution closing speeches is
CORRECT?
[A] The prosecution is not entitled to make a closing speech because Antonia is unrepresented and
has introduced no evidence other than giving evidence herself.
[B] The prosecution is not entitled to make a closing speech because Antonia is unrepresented.
[C] The prosecution is entitled to make a closing speech because Antonia has giving evidence
herself in her own defence.
[D] The prosecution is entitled to make a closing speech because Antonia is unrepresented and has
introduced no evidence other than giving evidence herself.
ANSWER
[A] is the correct answer. At summary trial the prosecution are only entitled to make a closing speech
where (i) the defendant is represented, or (ii) whether or not he is represented, the defendant has
introduced evidence other than his own (CrimPR r.24.3(3)(h)). As such, the prosecution cannot make
a closing speech in a case involving an unrepresented defendant who does not rely on any evidence
other than what he says in the witness box himself.
P a g e 3 | 33
, Question 4
Regarding giving reasons for a verdict in the Magistrates’ Court, which ONE of the following
propositions is CORRECT?
[A] The Magistrates must give reasons both for convicting a defendant and acquitting a defendant
following summary trial..
[B] The Magistrates have a discretion whether or not to give reasons both for convicting a defendant
and acquitting a defendant following summary trial..
[C] The Magistrates must give reasons for acquitting a defendant but need not give reasons for
convicting a defendant following summary trial.
[D] The Magistrates must give reasons for convicting a defendant but need not give reasons for
acquitting a defendant following summary trial..
ANSWER
[D] is the correct answer. If the magistrates convict a defendant sufficient reasons must be given to
explain the decision (CrimPR r.24.3(5)). This does not require a detailed judgment; rather it is to ensure
that a defendant should understand why he has been convicted and usually the reasons can be given
in a simple and straightforward manner. Where the defendant is acquitted of the offence, the
magistrates may give reasons for finding the defendant not guilty but are not required to do so.
P a g e 4 | 33
