Concentrate Questions and Answers Evidence

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Expert Opinion ◽  
Law Students ◽  
Expert Advice ◽  
Supporting Evidence ◽  
Standard Of Proof ◽  
Character Evidence ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
Flow Charts

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions and coursework. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and illustrative diagrams and flow charts. Concentrate Q&A Evidence offers expert advice on what to expect from your Evidence exam, how best to prepare and guidance on what examiners are really looking for. Written by experienced examiners, it provides clear commentary with each question and answer and bullet points and diagram answer plans plus tips to make your answer really stand out from the crowd and further reading suggestions at the end of every chapter. The book should help the reader identify typical law exam questions, structure a first-class answer, avoid common mistakes, show the examiner what the reader knows and find relevant further reading. After an introduction, the book covers burden and standard of proof, presumptions, competence and compellability, Special Measures Directions, character evidence, hearsay, confessions, the defendant’s silence, improperly obtained evidence, supporting evidence, identification expert opinion, issues in the course of trial, privilege, public policy and mixed questions. The final chapter gives guidance on assessed coursework. The book is suitable for undergraduate law students taking optional modules in Evidence.

8. Opinion evidence

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Expert Opinion ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Expert Evidence ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
Flow Charts ◽  
Scientific Expertise ◽  
Civil Trials

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and diagrams and flow charts. This chapter explores an area of evidence law dominated by expert witness evidence and the extent to which flawed testimony leads to miscarriages of justice. Expert evidence is now commonplace in criminal and civil trials, and the courts and Parliament have developed procedures to ensure that it is of high quality. These are an eclectic mix of common law and statute and their development reflects the importance of scientific expertise. It is necessary to be familiar with the differences between expert and non-expert opinion evidence and on when and in what circumstances both types are admissible and questions that can be asked of the expert whilst giving evidence. The approach depends on whether the question relates to civil or criminal trials

7. Supporting evidence: lies, identification evidence and suspect witnesses

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Supporting Evidence ◽  
Supportive Evidence ◽  
Codes Of Practice ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
Flow Charts ◽  
Identification Procedures

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and illustrative diagrams and flow charts. This chapter discusses supporting evidence, which is variously referred to in textbooks as hazardous evidence, supporting evidence or safeguards against unreliability and error. Supporting evidence encompasses types of evidence that might intrinsically be of questionable reliability and, therefore, require supportive evidence. Key areas are disputed identification and lies told by the defendant. It is important to be familiar with the two distinct ways that the reliability of identification evidence is enhanced: first, the judge should issue the Turnbull guidelines; and, secondly, Code D of the Codes of Practice of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 should be followed in relation to identification procedures.

2. Burden and standard of proof: Presumptions

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Standard Of Proof ◽  
Statutory Provision ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
Flow Charts ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Law Of Evidence

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and illustrative diagrams and flow charts. This chapter discusses the allocation of the burden of proof in civil and criminal trials, depending on who should bear the risk. In criminal trials the ‘presumption of innocence’ means that the burden is on the prosecution, unless reversed by express or implied statutory provision. The law of evidence safeguards what in some jurisdictions is a civil right backed by the constitution. It is important to understand the difference between the legal and evidential burden and the occasions where they are separately allocated. Tricky areas are where there is a divorce of the legal and evidential burden, primarily in situations where the prosecution cannot expect to put up evidence to anticipate every specific defence the accused may present.

10. Privilege and public policy

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Common Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Right To Silence ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
Flow Charts ◽  
Legal Professional ◽  
The Right

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and diagrams and flow charts. This chapter covers evidence excluded for policy or public interest considerations: public interest immunity (PII). A party, witness or non-participant in proceedings may refuse to disclose information, papers or answer questions, even though such material may be highly relevant and reliable. If PII applies, neither party has access to the evidence. For privilege, the areas most likely to occur in Evidence courses are privilege against self-incrimination and legal professional privilege. The former includes the right to silence of the defendant. The privilege against self-incrimination is generally upheld by common law and by implication by Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Legal professional privilege is a common law exclusionary rule principle that applies in civil and criminal proceedings.

2. Burden and standard of proof: presumptions

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Standard Of Proof ◽  
Statutory Provision ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
Flow Charts ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Law Of Evidence

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and illustrative diagrams and flow charts. This chapter discusses the allocation of the burden of proof in civil and criminal trials, depending on who should bear the risk. In criminal trials the ‘presumption of innocence’ means that the burden is on the prosecution, unless reversed by express or implied statutory provision. The law of evidence safeguards what in some jurisdictions is a civil right backed by the constitution. It is important to understand the difference between the legal and evidential burden and the occasions where they are separately allocated. Tricky areas are where there is a divorce of the legal and evidential burden, primarily in situations where the prosecution cannot expect to put up evidence to anticipate every specific defence the accused may present.

10. Privilege and public policy

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Common Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Right To Silence ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
Flow Charts ◽  
Legal Professional ◽  
The Right

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and diagrams and flow charts. This chapter covers evidence excluded for policy or public interest considerations: public interest immunity (PII). A party, witness or non-participant in proceedings may refuse to disclose information, papers or answer questions, even though such material may be highly relevant and reliable. If PII applies, neither party has access to the evidence. For privilege, the areas most likely to occur in Evidence courses are privilege against self-incrimination and legal professional privilege. The former includes the right to silence of the defendant. The privilege against self-incrimination is generally upheld by common law and by implication by Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Legal professional privilege is a common law exclusionary rule principle that applies in civil and criminal proceedings.

7. Supporting evidence: Lies, identification evidence, and suspect witnesses

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Supporting Evidence ◽  
Supportive Evidence ◽  
Codes Of Practice ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
Flow Charts ◽  
Identification Procedures

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and illustrative diagrams and flow charts. This chapter discusses supporting evidence, which is variously referred to in textbooks as hazardous evidence, supporting evidence or safeguards against unreliability and error. Supporting evidence encompasses types of evidence that might intrinsically be of questionable reliability and, therefore, require supportive evidence. Key areas are disputed identification and lies told by the defendant. It is important to be familiar with the two distinct ways that the reliability of identification evidence is enhanced: first, the judge should issue the Turnbull guidelines; and, secondly, Code D of the Codes of Practice of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 should be followed in relation to identification procedures.

8. Opinion evidence

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen Spencer ◽  
John Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Expert Opinion ◽  
Expert Witness ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Expert Evidence ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Questions And Answers ◽  
Flow Charts ◽  
Scientific Expertise ◽  
Civil Trials

The Concentrate Questions and Answers series offers the best preparation for tackling exam questions. Each book includes typical questions, bullet-pointed answer plans and suggested answers, author commentary and diagrams and flow charts. This chapter explores an area of evidence law dominated by expert witness evidence and the extent to which flawed testimony leads to miscarriages of justice. Expert evidence is now commonplace in criminal and civil trials, and the courts and Parliament have developed procedures to ensure that it is of high quality. These are an eclectic mix of common law and statute and their development reflects the importance of scientific expertise. It is necessary to be familiar with the differences between expert and non-expert opinion evidence and on when and in what circumstances both types are admissible and questions that can be asked of the expert whilst giving evidence. The approach depends on whether the question relates to civil or criminal trials.

scholarly journals Climate scientists set the bar of proof too high

2021 ◽  
Vol 165 (3-4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth A. Lloyd ◽  
Naomi Oreskes ◽  
Sonia I. Seneviratne ◽  
Edward J. Larson
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Public Communication ◽  
Central Question ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Public ◽  
Standard Of Proof ◽  
Policy Context ◽  
Standards Of Proof

AbstractStandards of proof for attributing real world events/damage to global warming should be the same as in clinical or environmental lawsuits, argue Lloyd et al. The central question that we raise is effective communication. How can climate scientists best and effectively communicate their findings to crucial non-expert audiences, including public policy makers and civil society? To address this question, we look at the mismatch between what courts require and what climate scientists are setting as a bar of proof. Our first point is that scientists typically demand too much of themselves in terms of evidence, in comparison with the level of evidence required in a legal, regulatory, or public policy context. Our second point is to recommend that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change recommend more prominently the use of the category “more likely than not” as a level of proof in their reports, as this corresponds to the standard of proof most frequently required in civil court rooms. This has also implications for public policy and the public communication of climate evidence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document