o R v Keenan (1989)
o Alladice (1988)
o Dunford (1990)
o Halliwell 2012
• Successive Confessions
o R v McGovern (1991)
o Gillard & Barrett (1991)
• Canale (1990)
• Gillard & Barrett (1991)
• Y v DPP (1991)
• PACE
o S56
o S58
Large Group Session 6 – Bad Character Evidence: Attack on Character Part
1
• Criminal Evidence Act 1898 – previous law
o Ds bad character could only come in after jury gave verdict
o i.e. past convictions
o to reduce risk of prejudice by jury
o very strong rule general rule
o fiercely guarded/respected/safe guarded by courts
20
, o exceptions – 2 main: always existed; rarely invoked/permitted
• Ask: are criticisms of CEA 1898 still true of CJA 2003?
o Imputation – suggesting bad character; case law unclear of what
judges accepy as an attack on character;difficult for defence
council when preparing arguments to not trigger loss of shield;
i.e. self-defence defences could risk losing shield
o Judge has complete discretion when taking away or keeping
shield
o i.e. theft, animal cruelty etc has nothing to do with credibility
o police fabricate evidence –> defence say evidence untrue –> D
attacking prosecution witness character -> shield potentially lost
• Justice for All – White Paper produced by Gov
• Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) – present law
o Abolished shield in old law
o Repealed case law ruled under old law
o General rule in CEA 1898 swept away
o R v Hanson – Parliament wants to increase conviction rate
• Bad character defined
o Tendency/habit/leaning towards misconduct
o Reprehensible – something other people might disapprove of;
very subjective; very broad; changes over time with society
o Judges determine what is or isn’t reprehensible behaviour
21
o Alladice (1988)
o Dunford (1990)
o Halliwell 2012
• Successive Confessions
o R v McGovern (1991)
o Gillard & Barrett (1991)
• Canale (1990)
• Gillard & Barrett (1991)
• Y v DPP (1991)
• PACE
o S56
o S58
Large Group Session 6 – Bad Character Evidence: Attack on Character Part
1
• Criminal Evidence Act 1898 – previous law
o Ds bad character could only come in after jury gave verdict
o i.e. past convictions
o to reduce risk of prejudice by jury
o very strong rule general rule
o fiercely guarded/respected/safe guarded by courts
20
, o exceptions – 2 main: always existed; rarely invoked/permitted
• Ask: are criticisms of CEA 1898 still true of CJA 2003?
o Imputation – suggesting bad character; case law unclear of what
judges accepy as an attack on character;difficult for defence
council when preparing arguments to not trigger loss of shield;
i.e. self-defence defences could risk losing shield
o Judge has complete discretion when taking away or keeping
shield
o i.e. theft, animal cruelty etc has nothing to do with credibility
o police fabricate evidence –> defence say evidence untrue –> D
attacking prosecution witness character -> shield potentially lost
• Justice for All – White Paper produced by Gov
• Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) – present law
o Abolished shield in old law
o Repealed case law ruled under old law
o General rule in CEA 1898 swept away
o R v Hanson – Parliament wants to increase conviction rate
• Bad character defined
o Tendency/habit/leaning towards misconduct
o Reprehensible – something other people might disapprove of;
very subjective; very broad; changes over time with society
o Judges determine what is or isn’t reprehensible behaviour
21
