MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS
ANSWERS
Bar Professional
Question 1
In trial, the defence advocate suggests to a witness that he is a ‘liar’ and a ‘conniving cheat’.
Which is the correct statement of the rules on the proper scope of cross examination?
[A] These accusations are permissible so long as they are not merely gratuitous insults and
serve to further understand the issues in the case
[B] These accusations could be defamatory and so are not permissible questions
[C] These accusations can be made, but given their insulting nature, the witness can invoke
their right against self-incrimination and decline to respond
[D] These accusations can only be made if they are based on credible evidence and made
on instruction
[A] This is the correct answer – see BCP F14, which refers readers to rC 7.1 of the
Handbook/Code of Conduct
P a g e 1 | 31
,Question 2
In a case of robbery the defendant made an incriminating remark on arrest, but he had not
been cautioned first. What is the correct process for determining the admissibility of the
incriminating remark?
[A] Remarks on arrest can always be relied upon, but only to prove fact of the remark, not the
truth of it
[B] If the remark was made without caution, then the evidence must be excluded under s.78
PACE
[C] If the remark is relevant, then ask assess if it should be excluded for breach of PACE by
assessing if its inclusion would have an adverse effect on the fairness of proceedings
[D] Assess if breach is significant and substantial, if not, then admit it to the jury asking them
to assess if the remark is relevant
[C] This is the correct answer, as it is a fair statement of the test in s.78 PACE which would
render inadmissible any (relevant) evidence incorrectly gathered which would have such an
adverse affect on the fairness of the trial that the court ought not to admit it.
P a g e 2 | 31
,Question 3
Emma is on trial in the Magistrates’ Court accused of possession of a bladed instrument
contrary to section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. She claims that she had the knife
in question with her because several young women had been attacked in the area where
she lives recently, and it was to be used to defend herself with if the need arose.
Section 139(4) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 provides:
“It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section (having any article
which has a blade, or is sharply pointed, in a public place) to prove that he had good reason or
lawful authority for having the article with him in a public place.”
What is the correct position in relation to any that burden that attach to Emma’s defence?
[A] Emma has the evidential burden to raise evidence to suggest that she had a good reason
for possession of the knife, and it is then for the prosecution to disprove this beyond
reasonable doubt.
[B] Emma has the legal burden of proving beyond reasonable doubt that she had a good
reason for possession of the knife in a public place.
[C] Emma has the evidential burden to raise evidence to suggest that she had a good reason
for possession of the knife, and it is then for the prosecution to disprove this on a balance
of probabilities.
[D] Emma has the legal burden of proving on a balance of probabilities that she had a good
reason for possession of the knife in a public place.
[D] CORRECT. See above.
P a g e 3 | 31
, Question 4
The prosecution wishes to call a 10 year old witness (Lara) to a kidnapping. Which of the
following correctly states the law in relation to her competence to give evidence?
[A] Lara is not competent to give evidence because she is only 10 years old.
[B] Lara will not be competent to give evidence if it appears to the court that she is
not able to understand questions put to her and to give answers that can be understood.
[C] Lara will only be competent to give evidence if she has a sufficient appreciation of the
solemnity of the occasion and of the particular responsibility to tell the truth which is
involved in taking an oath.
[D] Lara will be competent to give evidence if it appears to the court that she understands it is
her duty to speak the truth and that she has sufficient understanding to justify her evidence
being heard.
[B] is CORRECT. Section 53(1) is subject to these qualifications which are contained in
section 53(3).
P a g e 4 | 31
ANSWERS
Bar Professional
Question 1
In trial, the defence advocate suggests to a witness that he is a ‘liar’ and a ‘conniving cheat’.
Which is the correct statement of the rules on the proper scope of cross examination?
[A] These accusations are permissible so long as they are not merely gratuitous insults and
serve to further understand the issues in the case
[B] These accusations could be defamatory and so are not permissible questions
[C] These accusations can be made, but given their insulting nature, the witness can invoke
their right against self-incrimination and decline to respond
[D] These accusations can only be made if they are based on credible evidence and made
on instruction
[A] This is the correct answer – see BCP F14, which refers readers to rC 7.1 of the
Handbook/Code of Conduct
P a g e 1 | 31
,Question 2
In a case of robbery the defendant made an incriminating remark on arrest, but he had not
been cautioned first. What is the correct process for determining the admissibility of the
incriminating remark?
[A] Remarks on arrest can always be relied upon, but only to prove fact of the remark, not the
truth of it
[B] If the remark was made without caution, then the evidence must be excluded under s.78
PACE
[C] If the remark is relevant, then ask assess if it should be excluded for breach of PACE by
assessing if its inclusion would have an adverse effect on the fairness of proceedings
[D] Assess if breach is significant and substantial, if not, then admit it to the jury asking them
to assess if the remark is relevant
[C] This is the correct answer, as it is a fair statement of the test in s.78 PACE which would
render inadmissible any (relevant) evidence incorrectly gathered which would have such an
adverse affect on the fairness of the trial that the court ought not to admit it.
P a g e 2 | 31
,Question 3
Emma is on trial in the Magistrates’ Court accused of possession of a bladed instrument
contrary to section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. She claims that she had the knife
in question with her because several young women had been attacked in the area where
she lives recently, and it was to be used to defend herself with if the need arose.
Section 139(4) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 provides:
“It shall be a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section (having any article
which has a blade, or is sharply pointed, in a public place) to prove that he had good reason or
lawful authority for having the article with him in a public place.”
What is the correct position in relation to any that burden that attach to Emma’s defence?
[A] Emma has the evidential burden to raise evidence to suggest that she had a good reason
for possession of the knife, and it is then for the prosecution to disprove this beyond
reasonable doubt.
[B] Emma has the legal burden of proving beyond reasonable doubt that she had a good
reason for possession of the knife in a public place.
[C] Emma has the evidential burden to raise evidence to suggest that she had a good reason
for possession of the knife, and it is then for the prosecution to disprove this on a balance
of probabilities.
[D] Emma has the legal burden of proving on a balance of probabilities that she had a good
reason for possession of the knife in a public place.
[D] CORRECT. See above.
P a g e 3 | 31
, Question 4
The prosecution wishes to call a 10 year old witness (Lara) to a kidnapping. Which of the
following correctly states the law in relation to her competence to give evidence?
[A] Lara is not competent to give evidence because she is only 10 years old.
[B] Lara will not be competent to give evidence if it appears to the court that she is
not able to understand questions put to her and to give answers that can be understood.
[C] Lara will only be competent to give evidence if she has a sufficient appreciation of the
solemnity of the occasion and of the particular responsibility to tell the truth which is
involved in taking an oath.
[D] Lara will be competent to give evidence if it appears to the court that she understands it is
her duty to speak the truth and that she has sufficient understanding to justify her evidence
being heard.
[B] is CORRECT. Section 53(1) is subject to these qualifications which are contained in
section 53(3).
P a g e 4 | 31
