Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

evidence 2 > corroboration > Flashcards

corroboration Flashcards

(93 cards)

Start Studying
1
Q

What are the two requirements for corroboration as set out in the Baskerville case?

A
  1. Independence of the second piece of evidence from the first piece of evidence.
  2. The second piece of evidence must tend to implicate the accused in the commissioning of the crime.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is the Irish courts’ approach to corroborative evidence that falls outside the strict Baskerville definition?

A

The Irish courts are willing to let juries rely on evidence as corroboration if it cumulatively meets the requirements of independence and tending to implicate the accused.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

In the DPP and Read case, what were the three concurrent circumstances that bolstered the credibility of the complainant’s testimony?

A
  1. Medical evidence regarding the condition of the complainant’s genitals.
  2. Evidence of the complainant’s distressed condition from her parents and Gardai.
  3. Evidence that the accused’s TV was set at a very loud level.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

True or False: The medical evidence of the complainant’s genitals alone constitutes corroboration.

A

False

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What does the cumulative approach to corroborative evidence allow in the Irish courts?

A

It allows multiple pieces of evidence, which individually may not meet the criteria, to be considered together as corroboration.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

What is the significance of the phrase ‘tending to connect him with the crime’ in the context of corroboration?

A

It allows a considerable margin of discretion to courts to decide what may constitute corroboration.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

What is the definition of an accomplice in the context of corroboration?

A

An accomplice is someone who was involved in the crime themselves.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

In the case of DP and My Brian Mean, what was the court’s view on the definition of corroboration?

A

The court viewed a more flexible approach to corroboration beyond the narrow formalistic definition of the Crown and Baskerville.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What is required for corroboration in cases involving accomplice testimony?

A

A mandatory corroboration warning is required, but corroboration itself is not necessary.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Fill in the blank: The evidence of phone traffic between Warren and the accused was considered ______ evidence corroborating Warren’s testimony.

A

[corroborative]

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What does the current approach to corroboration emphasize regarding the nature of the defense?

A

The nature of the defense may be critical in determining what is corroborative evidence.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What must be established for evidence to be considered corroborative in relation to confession evidence?

A

Evidence must be independent, tend to implicate the accused, and be credible.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

True or False: Corroborative evidence must directly prove that the accused committed the offense.

A

False

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What does the cumulative value of various pieces of circumstantial evidence imply in the context of corroboration?

A

It suggests that multiple pieces of evidence can collectively meet the criteria for corroboration.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What is the general rule regarding the requirement for corroboration in criminal cases?

A

The accused may be convicted of an offense by the testimony of one witness; corroboration is not generally required.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

List examples of offenses where corroboration is required.

A
  • Perjury
  • Treason under the Treason Act
  • Offenses where proof of speed is necessary under the Road Traffic Act
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What is required for conviction in certain offenses?

A

Evidence must be corroborated

Examples include perjury and treason under the Treason Act.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

In which cases is corroboration not required?

A

In most cases, corroboration is not required

Exceptions still fall under the general rule where corroboration is not needed.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What must judges do when the prosecution’s case relies on unreliable evidence?

A

Give a corroboration warning to the jury

This warning is mandatory for unreliable witness categories.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

What is the purpose of a corroboration warning?

A

To caution the jury about the dangers of convicting on uncorroborated evidence

The jury can still convict if they are satisfied of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

What does Section 10 of the Criminal Procedure Act address?

A

It requires judges to advise juries on the absence of corroboration for confessions

This differs from common law settings.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

What is the rationale for requiring corroboration warnings?

A

To avert the risk of unreliable testimony leading to wrongful convictions

This is especially relevant for certain types of witnesses.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

What categories of witnesses require specific corroboration warnings?

A

Accomplices, children, complainants in sexual offense cases, and visual identification evidence

Accomplices will be the main focus of discussion.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

What is the definition of an accomplice?

A

A person involved in the crime who may provide unreliable testimony

The definition varies by jurisdiction.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
What must juries be warned about when considering the testimony of an accomplice?
It is dangerous to convict based solely on their uncorroborated evidence ## Footnote The warning is mandatory if the witness is classified as an accomplice.
26
What is the traditional approach to defining an accomplice?
A witness capable of being charged with the same offense as the defendant ## Footnote This definition has been criticized for being too narrow.
27
What example illustrates the traditional approach to accomplices?
The case of Crowning King in 1914, where a prostitute could not be an accomplice for living on immoral earnings ## Footnote She could not be charged with the same offense.
28
What did the House of Lords conclude about accomplices in the Davies case?
No formal definition exists; participants in the crime are typically treated as accomplices ## Footnote This includes principals and accessories.
29
What is a key consideration for determining if someone is an accomplice?
Whether they could be charged with the same crime as the defendant ## Footnote This relates to the reliability of their testimony.
30
What broader definition do Australian courts adopt for accomplices?
A person who is involved in the same events as the charge and could exaggerate or fabricate testimony ## Footnote The Irish approach is even broader.
31
What did the Irish courts state regarding the definition of an accomplice in the Linehan case?
A person implicated as principal or accessory in the crime under investigation is an accomplice ## Footnote This definition acknowledges varying degrees of complicity.
32
True or False: An accomplice's potential conviction must be serious enough to tempt them to lie.
False ## Footnote The Irish approach does not consider the severity of potential convictions.
33
What is the definition of an accomplice?
A person implicated either as principal or accessory in the crime under investigation.
34
Does being found not guilty of a crime eliminate a person's status as an accomplice?
No, being found not guilty does not rule out the possibility of being an accomplice.
35
What does the court say about the degree of complicity in relation to being an accomplice?
A slight degree of complicity, either as principal or accessory, is sufficient to render a person an accomplice.
36
Can a perjurer be considered an accomplice?
Yes, a perjurer can be deemed an accomplice even if they cannot be convicted as a principal or accessory.
37
In the context of abortion, how is a woman upon whom an abortion is performed classified legally?
She can be considered an accomplice, even though she may not be chargeable with the crime of committing an illegal abortion.
38
What is the significance of character in determining a witness's status as an accomplice?
A witness's character as an accomplice requires a corroboration warning due to the potential unreliability of their testimony.
39
True or False: A spouse of an accomplice is always considered an accomplice.
False, it is a case-by-case determination.
40
Who ultimately decides if a witness is an accomplice?
It is ultimately for the jury to decide whether a witness is an accomplice.
41
What is a conditional corroboration warning?
A warning given by the judge that applies only if the jury determines the witness is an accomplice.
42
What must the jury do if they believe a witness is an accomplice?
They should be wary of relying solely on the testimony of that witness.
43
What is the Irish courts' stance on a witness being clearly identified as an accomplice?
Irish courts state it is always a matter for the jury to determine.
44
What happens if the trial judge believes a witness is not an accomplice?
No corroboration warning should be given.
45
What is the role of the trial judge regarding the jury's perception of a witness's status?
The judge must leave the decision to the jury, even if they believe the witness is an accomplice.
46
What is the requirement for a corroboration warning if a witness is potentially an accomplice?
A conditional corroboration warning must be given.
47
In the context of an accessory after the fact, what constitutes being an accomplice?
A minor link to the crime that obstructs justice can make someone an accomplice.
48
Who rules on whether a witness is capable of being regarded as an accomplice?
The trial judge rules on this as a matter of law.
49
What must the jury consider regarding corroboration evidence?
They must decide if the evidence is independent and tends to show the Commission of the crime by the accused.
50
What historical aspect did the Court of Criminal Appeal uphold regarding accomplices?
It affirmed that the jury must ultimately decide if a witness is an accomplice.
51
What is the initial issue regarding witness testimony in legal proceedings?
Whether a witness is an accomplice and if their testimony can be corroborated beyond reasonable doubt ## Footnote The jury must evaluate independent testimony to determine the credibility of the evidence presented.
52
What does it mean for a witness to be part of the witness protection program?
They are not strictly classified as accomplices; they may simply be victims needing protection ## Footnote The witness protection program developed initially for accomplices, but is treated separately in law.
53
What term is used informally to describe a witness in a witness protection program who provides testimony against associates?
Supergrass ## Footnote This term refers to a terrorist informer who gives evidence for the prosecution in exchange for significant benefits.
54
What are the concerns raised about supergrass evidence?
It can lead to wrongful convictions due to the potential for lying in exchange for benefits ## Footnote Recommendations have been made for stricter requirements for corroboration of supergrass testimony.
55
What was the significant case related to the murder of Veronica Guerin?
The murder involved a journalist shot in broad daylight, leading to the establishment of a witness protection program in Ireland ## Footnote The case generated significant public attention and pressure to secure convictions.
56
What issues did the courts identify regarding the witness protection program?
Lack of clear guidelines and an ongoing series of demands from witnesses ## Footnote The courts criticized how the program was implemented and the fluidity of witness demands.
57
What protections were offered to witnesses in the witness protection program?
Immunity from prosecution for murder, modest sentences for lesser offenses, special concessions, and monetary payments ## Footnote Witnesses could receive new identities and their families would also be protected.
58
What was the court's conclusion in the case of Ward regarding the accomplice testimony?
The testimony was deemed unreliable due to the witness's self-serving motives and benefits received for testifying ## Footnote The court quashed the conviction due to the lack of corroboration for the accomplice's evidence.
59
How did the court view the benefits received by witnesses under the witness protection program in the Gilligan case?
The court acknowledged the program's poor implementation but did not find evidence of bribery for testimony ## Footnote Witnesses were seeking benefits, which was expected, but it did not equate to outright buying of evidence.
60
What did the Supreme Court determine regarding evidence from witnesses in the witness protection program?
The same approach for corroboration warnings applies to evidence from such witnesses as it does for accomplices ## Footnote The court emphasized the need for corroborative evidence to ensure fair trials.
61
What must corroborative evidence do to implicate the accused?
It should be independent, credible, and tend to implicate the accused in the commission of the offense ## Footnote This is crucial for ensuring the reliability of the evidence presented in court.
62
What was the outcome of the appeal in the case of ME regarding the witness's testimony?
The appeal was based on inadequate corroboration of the accomplice's evidence ## Footnote The court acknowledged the need for reevaluation of existing legal precedents in light of this case.
63
What is the main issue regarding the witness Russell Warren in the case of ME?
Russell Warren was an accomplice whose evidence linking the accused to the murder was not adequately corroborated ## Footnote This raised concerns about the reliability of his testimony in the context of the accused's conviction.
64
What significant social issues are mentioned in relation to modern Ireland?
Ireland is awash with illegal drugs and gangland killings related to that trade ## Footnote This context highlights the challenges faced by the legal system in prosecuting serious crimes.
65
What is the role of the witness protection program in the context of criminal trials?
It may provide effective means of dealing with gang-related activities and serious crime prosecution ## Footnote Evidence from witnesses in this program must be treated with caution but can be acted upon if deemed credible.
66
How should the court treat evidence from a witness protection program?
It must be treated with caution and is distinct from accomplice evidence, requiring separate warnings ## Footnote This distinction is important for jury considerations in trials.
67
What did the Court of Criminal Appeal decide regarding the evidence of protected witnesses?
The evidence is a category of potentially unreliable evidence separate from accomplices ## Footnote This emphasizes the need for careful evaluation of such testimony.
68
In the case of Brian Ryan, what was the prosecution's claim against the accused?
The prosecution claimed the accused transported the shooter to and from the crime scene ## Footnote This fact was central to the trial proceedings.
69
What type of warning must be given if a witness is both an accomplice and in the witness protection program?
A single warning that addresses both aspects of being an accomplice and being in the witness protection program ## Footnote This approach simplifies the jury's understanding without losing necessary caution.
70
What does the term 'supergrass' refer to in the context of accomplice testimony?
It refers to a witness who implicates multiple accomplices in criminal activity ## Footnote The term is used colloquially and is not typically adopted in Irish courts.
71
What is the legal status of corroboration for children's unsworn testimony?
Corroboration is no longer required for unsworn testimony of children ## Footnote This change reflects a shift in how the legal system views children's credibility.
72
What was the rationale for historically requiring corroboration for children's testimony?
Concerns about children's understanding of truth and the influence of adults on their testimony ## Footnote This led to stricter rules regarding the admissibility of their evidence.
73
What is the doctrine of recent complaints in sexual offence cases?
It allows evidence of recent complaints to be admitted to support the credibility of a complainant but not as corroboration ## Footnote This doctrine helps address the reliability of testimony in sexual offence trials.
74
What does the term 'complaint' refer to in the context of sexual offence cases?
It refers to any pretrial statement made by the complainant about the offence, not just formal complaints ## Footnote This broad definition allows for more flexibility in court.
75
Why is it important to instruct the jury on the purpose of recent complaint evidence?
To clarify that it is only to establish the credibility of the complainant and not evidence of the facts of the offence ## Footnote This distinction is crucial for proper jury deliberation.
76
What is the purpose of admitting evidence of a complaint made by a complainant to a third party?
To establish the consistency of the complaint with the evidence of the complainant ## Footnote The jury should be informed that such evidence does not constitute corroboration in the legal sense.
77
What must the jury be informed about evidence of a complaint?
It is not evidence of the facts on which the complaint is based, but shows that the victim's conduct was consistent with her testimony.
78
What does corroboration in the legal sense involve?
Independent evidence other than the complainant's evidence.
79
What are the two requirements for a complaint to be admissible in a trial for a sexual offence?
* Made as speedily as could reasonably be expected * Made voluntarily, not as a result of inducements or exhortations
80
What was the significance of the Brophy case regarding the timing of complaints?
The court stated that the complaint must be made as speedily as could reasonably be expected.
81
In the context of recent complaints, who can make a complaint to the police?
Someone other than the injured party.
82
What does the doctrine of recent complaint entail?
If the victim goes to the first people after the incident, their statements may constitute a recent complaint.
83
What did the Court of Criminal Appeal in German conclude about the complainant's delay in reporting?
The complainant was justified in not making an immediate complaint.
84
What is the current understanding of 'first reasonable opportunity' in complaints?
It depends on the circumstances, including the character of the complainant and their relationship with the person to whom they complained.
85
What emotional responses might delay a victim from making a complaint?
* Fear of reprisals * Risk of rejection * Embarrassment * Humiliation * Guilt * Shame
86
What does the case of AC illustrate about the consistency of complaints?
The initial complaint does not need to contain all details but must not be positively inconsistent with the testimony.
87
True or False: The entirety of the complainant's version of events must be retold to the recipient of the complaint for it to be admissible.
False.
88
Fill in the blank: The courts have acknowledged that victims often need _______ before they can disclose what has been done to them.
[time]
89
What did Foley argue regarding the assumption that promptness is linked with credit?
It must be seen as an invalid assumption.
90
What was the conclusion of the court regarding the complainant in the 1995 case of historical child sexual abuse?
The complaint made 20 years later was deemed reasonable due to the circumstances surrounding the complainant's mother.
91
What must be demonstrated for the evidence of a complaint to be admissible?
Consistency with the complainant's evidence at trial.
92
What is the significance of the phrase 'all or nothing' in relation to recent complaints?
If the complaint does not meet the exception, the jury does not hear that the complaint was made.
93
What is a key factor that affects how consistent a complaint must be with the complainant's evidence?
Each case must be determined on its own facts.

evidence 2 (1 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions