Sunday, September 28, 2008

Judges as scholars

›
Who are top of the heap, judges or academics? Should academics be allowed to slap down judges for their indulgence in scholarship when they ...
Friday, September 26, 2008

How much have you got?

›
The presumption of innocence refers to two things: the burden of proof and the standard of proof. It means that the burden of proof is on th...
Friday, September 12, 2008

More on standards of proof of preliminary facts

›
In Canada it is necessary that compliance with procedures for interviewing young people be established beyond reasonable doubt: R v LTH [20...
Thursday, September 11, 2008

I'm bad, I'm bad!

›
“I am so bad that you can't rely on my confession”: like the Cretan liar, the accused in R v Bonisteel [2008] BCCA 344 (9 September 200...
Thursday, September 04, 2008

Business as usual

›
Like everyone else, I spend much of my time looking out the window. Except for blind people of course. And those in cells without views. My ...
Thursday, August 28, 2008

A slave to the law

›
When mens rea requires intention, problems may arise from ignorance of the law being no excuse. This has been illustrated in drug possession...
Sunday, August 24, 2008

Now we are four!

›
Good grief, was that four years of blogging? Just an amusing hobby.
Monday, August 04, 2008

Appellant accuses counsel

›
In Muirhead v R (Jamaica) [2008] UKPC 39 (28 July 2008) the Privy Council allowed an appeal against conviction for murder because of fundam...
Friday, August 01, 2008

Pensees d'escalier

›
An illustration of how the principle of finality in litigation can prevent a superior court of record from correcting its errors after the n...
Thursday, July 31, 2008

Enticed co-operation and its rewards

›
When does giving a defendant information as to the possible consequences of his co-operation with the prosecution amount to an abuse of proc...
Tuesday, July 29, 2008

Appeals on moot questions

›
It is a relief to see that the Supreme Court did not need to refer again to the balance of probabilities (see last blog) when it granted lea...
Friday, July 25, 2008

Proof and consequences

›
Cynical barristers – few though they may be – probably think that judges fudge the standard of proof so that they can decide issues as they ...
Sunday, July 20, 2008

Probative value and prejudicial effect

›
In M v R [2008] NZSC 52 the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal in a case where the Court of Appeal ([2008] NZCA 112) had been split ove...
Saturday, July 19, 2008

Recent invention afterthoughts ...

›
I should add to my comments on R v Barlien , last blog (8 July 2008) a reference to the Court of Appeal’s decision of 6 June 2008 in R v S ...
Tuesday, July 08, 2008

Prior consistent statements

›
In R v Barlien [2008] NZCA 180 (24 June 2008) the Court made some important criticisms of s 35 of the Evidence Act 2006. The Court ordered ...
Friday, July 04, 2008

A note on good character direction cases

›
Just a note on Maye v R (Jamaica) [2008] UKPC 35 (1 July 2008): the Board referred to recent decisions on the failure of the judge to give ...
Thursday, July 03, 2008

Liability 101: a tutorial teaser

›
An aspect of the mens rea requirements for liability as a secondary party to an offence was decided in R v Rahman [2008] UKHL 45 (2 July 20...

Policy fairness and trial fairness

›
There are times when the concept of a fair trial calls for explanation. Different notions of what a fair trial is lie behind the 6-1 split i...
Monday, June 30, 2008

Counsel misconduct: unfair or merely improper?

›
When does it matter that counsel conducts a case improperly? In Huggins v The State (Trinidad and Tobago) [2008] UKPC 30 (9 June 2008) pros...