Law of Criminal Evidence Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Law of Criminal Evidence - Essay ExampleThe prosecution already had evidence of his addition to the larceny, which were strong enough to convict him. The evidential clog in this case had been brought forth due to the front of the admission statements from the police interrogations. However, the prosecution would justify their evidential burden if the prosecutor gave more evidence linking Robert to the larceny of the iPods. In Asif and Mollys cases, the prosecution had the burden of proof. The standard applicable here is the beyond commonsensible doubt legal standard1. Asif had been accused of stealing iPods and so was Molly. Although the evidential burden was represented by the demonstration of witnesses who claimed that they saw Asif stealing the iPods, the evidential burden was yet to be depicted as far as Molly was concerned. There are no witnesses who associated that Molly had interpreted dampen in the theft. The prosecutor had the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt, to present evidence linking Molly to the theft of the iPods. In the case of brattish vs. Attorney General of Northern Ireland2, Lord Moris stated that a mouthy excuse should not be reason as enough evidence to convict the accused. The motorcoachs allegations depicting that Molly and asif had taken part in the theft was not enough evidence. Roberts own confession of his participation in the theft plays a major role in the evidence burden3. However, advising him that engaging a solicitor would protract the butt on was a misguidance.... In both cases, he had been deceived into the confession. Although this is a good defense, the prosecution might counteract this by arguing that the defendant did not have to worry about the involvement of the police and the court if he was innocent. The fact that he was afraid of the police and the court meant that there was something he knew about the crime, which he did not want to bring forward. Such claims would act as a disadvantage to Roberts c ase. In otherwise words, it would be hard to convince the panel to abandon the confessions made by Robert when he was interrogated by the manager and the police. Legally, the police had a right to advice Robert about his right to remaining silence. However, advising him that engaging a solicitor would lengthen the process was a misguidance. This is because they knew that he would eventually need one since they were sure that they he would be taken to court. On the other hand, the police might claim that they were simply using tactics to make him assort the truth. The law gives accused individuals a right to silence when interrogated by the police. However, sections 34-39 of the 1994 act imposed limitations on this law. In the case of Rice vs. Connolly, it was held that individuals had no right to answer police questions if they are not arrested4. However, this section gives the jury the right to make adverse inferences as a result of the accused persons silence. In other words, Mo lly was anticipate to mention that he was under duress when he performed the crime. Molly was expected to mention that Asif was mad and that he had threatened to break her legs she failed to carry out the act of crime. She should have unless mentioned that the she was sure Asif would go ahead with his