Deck 7: Confession Evidence

Question 1

A confession is classed as hearsay, but is an exception to the rule as it is preserved under S118 (5) of the Criminal Justice Act . S118 (5) allows a confession to be admissible as hearsay evidence provided it falls under the admissibility test outlined in S76 (1) Criminal Evidence (PACE) Act 1984

Answer 1

True

Question 2

When can a confession be excluded? The confession can be excluded using S76 (2) (a) + (b), S78 and if the prosecution cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt they obtained the confession legally.

A) If it is unreliable.
B) Judge thinks its inclusion would have an adverse effect on the fairness of the trial
C) If the prosecution cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt they obtained it fairly and properly.
D) If it amounts to oppression.

Answer 2

A, B, C, D

Question 3

Which of the following statements are correct? The correct answers are A and B. A confession can be made to any person, they are all subject to the test of admissibility under S76. If a confession is not made by the accussed, then it is inadmissible. See R v Ward.

A)A confession does not have to be made to a police officer.
B)A confession must by made by the accused.
C)All confessions will be admissible if they are known to be true.
D)A police officer can use physical abuse to obtain a confession from a suspect

Answer 3

A, B

Question 4

Which of the following has been held to amount to oppression, making the confession inadmissible. Under S76 (2) (a) conduct which consititutes oppression that is directly linked to a confession will be inadmissible. In all of the cases above, the conduct constituting oppression, outlined in S.76 (8). In B, swearing and rasing their voice, may seem impatient, but does not amount to oppression. See R v Emerson.

A) Police told the suspect that the husbands lover was next door, making the defendant confess in order to be moved.
B) A police officer swore and raised their voice at the suspect during questioning.
C) Police officer bullied and hectored a defedant, making him deny a murder 300 times until he confessed.
D) A suspect was tortured, denied sleep and their fingernails were torn out.

Question 5

What were the implications of the new section 76A inserted by the Criminal Justice Act 2003? A co-accused can now rely on a confession made by the accused. The burden of proof is lower than that of the prosecution, in that the co-accused must prove on the balance of probablities that the confession wasn not obtained by oppresion of is unreliable.

A)It allowed all confessions made to the police admissible as evidence.
B)It allows a defendant to rely on a confession made by a co-accused.
C)It gave a new defintion of oppression.
D)It outlines which Codes of Practice of PACE that must be breached in order for the confession to be unreliable.

Question 6

Which Section of PACE allows a judge to use his discretion to exclude a confession? A judge may use S78 (1) PACE to exclude a confession as evidence if the confession would have ""such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings.""

A) S76 (1)
B) S76 (2) (b)
C) S58
D) S78 (1)
E) S77

Question 7

Which Code of Practice, outlined in PACE 1984, is central to many challenges to confession evidence ? Although all of them could be breached to make the confession inadmissible, in many cases, Code C has been breached by the police. This code covers issues such as the right to legal advice and the questioning of a suspect.

A)Code A - Powers of stop and search and public encounters
B)Code B - search of premises and seizure and property
C)Code C - Detention, treatment and questioning of suspects
D)Code D - Identification procedures
E)Code E - Audio recording of police interviews

Question 8

When trying to establish a confession as evidence, the burden of proof is on whom? The prosecution must be able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the confession was not obtained by oppression under S76 (2) (a) PACE 1984 or anything that could make the confession unreliable. (S76. (2) (b).

A) The burden of proof is on the defendant to prove on the balance of probabilities , that the confession was obtained unfairly.
B) The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the confession was not obtained unfairly or in breach of S76.
C) The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove on the balance of probabilities that the confession was obtained unfairly.
D) The burden of proof is on the defendant to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the confession was obtained in breach of S76 PACE.

Question 9

A confession will be held inadmissible if a mentally handicapped person did not have an appropriate adult present during their police interview in which they confessed. It will be held inadmissible under S77 PACE 1984. In addition Code C of PACE states an appropriate adult must be present when interviewing a juvenile or an mentally disordered or handicapped person. See R v Moss - a mentally disordered person was interview 9 times until they confessed without an appropriate adult present.

Question 10

Julie is being questioned by the police. When asked whether she was responsible for the murder, she nods her head in acceptance. This constitutes a confession. Provided thatthe prosecution can prove under that the confession was not obtained by oppression and that it is reliable, it will be admissible. A confession may be made orally, in writing or by conduct, including the nodding of the head. See R v Christie

Question 11

A suspect with a higher level of intelligence should have higher tolerance levels when the courts are trying to ascertain whether a defendant has been oppressed. The characteristics of a suspect can be considered in determining whether a confession was obtained by oppression. In Paris, Abdullahi and Miller, the fact the suspect was below normal intelligence and on the boderline of mentally handicapped was taken into consideration. In R v Seeling, it was taken into account that the defendant wa

Question 12

Jim, a drug addict, confesses to police in order to be released from custody to feed his addiction. The court cannot rely on the confession as it is unrealiable. The Court of Appeal held in R v Goldenberg, that 'anything said or done,' a prerequisite for a confession to be held unrealiable under S76 (2)

Question 13

A failure to record an interview at a police station will automatically exclude a confession as evidence. Breaches of the Codes of Practice will not automatically exclude a confession. Depending on the gravity of the breach, a confession may be excluded if a number of serious breaches occur. In R v Sparks, failure to record a police interview did not result in oppression or make the confession unrelaible.

Question 14

A confession will be inadmissible if the prosecution cannot prove beyond reasonable doubt they obtained it properly, even if it is known to be true. The prosecution have to prove they obtained the confession properly. If they cannot show they did not gain the confession by means of oppression or by anything that could make the confession unreliable, it will be inadmissible as evidence.

Question 15

According to R v Barry,what three steps should a judge follow when determining whether a confession should be excluded on grounds of unreliabilty? The Court of Appeal held that a judge must; a) identify what was said or done b) whether what was said or done renders the confession unreliable, when taking all the circumstances into account c) Finally the judge should ask whether the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the confession