Law of Evidence & Proof

Question 1

Woolmington principle: Presumption of innocence

Answer 1

The burden of proof lies clearly with the prosecution in relation to all of the elements of the offence

Question 2

Practical obligation on the defence

Answer 2

If the prosecution proves the facts in issue (mens rea/actus reus), the defendant has to produce some story or evidence if he wants to suggest the conclusion is wrong.

This is not a burden of proof - it is practical obligation to point to some evidence that suggest a reasonable doubt about the conclusion

Question 3

Evidential burden on the defence

Answer 3

It is up to the defendant to point to some evidence that suggest an explanation e.g. self defence. In order to put up a defence (making it a live issue), there is an evidential burden on the defendant.

The burden of proof remains with the prosecution to destroy the defence

Question 4

Exceptions to the Woolmington principle

Answer 4

Cases where the burden of proof lies on the defendant

• Defence of insanity (section 23)
• Specific statutory exceptions exist i.e. possession of an offensive weapon (defendant to prove that the absence of intent)
• Offence is a public welfare regulatory offence e.g. strict liability offences (burden on the defendant to prove a total absence of fault)

Question 5

Beyond reasonable doubt

Answer 5

R v Wanhalla

An honest and reasonable uncertainty left in your mind about the guilt of the defendant after you have given careful and impartial consideration to all of the evidence

Question 6

Balance of probabilities

Answer 6

Defence only have to prove on the balance of probabilities, meaning simply showing that it is more probable than not