Silence and Inferences

Silence and Inferences - Silence and Inferences Common Law...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Silence and Inferences Common Law There has generally been no duty on your client either to assist the police or their enquiries or to give evidence at his own trial, however: S34 CJPOA 1994- Failure to put forward defence facts 1. The client must have been cautioned 2. The inference can only arise in the face of questioning by either the police or persons ‘charged with the duty to investigate offences or charge offenders’ 3. The inference can arise at charge - i.e. when the police have sufficient evidence that they do not need to interview ( Goodsir 2006) 4. It is only in relation to defence facts- not answering questions 5. The inferences to be drawn will be circumstantial: A person should not be found guilty simply on the basis that they failed to answer police questions. An inference is never sufficient in itself to found a conviction. 6. It can only be drawn if it is ‘reasonable to do so’ . This is a matter for the jury- Argent [1997] a. Could he have been reasonably expected to mention the defence facts? b.
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/25/2012 for the course ECO 101 taught by Professor Staff during the Fall '10 term at Texas State.

Page1 / 2

Silence and Inferences - Silence and Inferences Common Law...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online