Page 340 - Magistrates Conference 2019

Where a statement is made in the presence of the accused in effect accusing him of a crime, the
accused’s silence is evidence against him of the facts stated in the accusation only in so far as he

adopts the statement: R v Christie (1914) AC 545 HOL

Where such a statement is made, the judge is under a duty to tell the jury the effect of the

statement and the possible acknowledgment that it is not evidence of the truth: Shabir Ali (1989)
36 WIR 410 PC

However when the allegations of a third party are repeated by a police officer to the defendant,
his silence alone cannot be an acknowledgment of their truth; even if he is not cautioned: Hall v

R (1970) 16 WIR 277 PC

Where suspicious circumstances appear to demand an explanation, and no explanation or an

entirely incredible explanation is given, the lack of explanation may warrant an inference of

guilty knowledge in the defendant: Raviraj et al (1986) 85 Cr App R 93

Where the defendant’s attorney is present with the police however it may be that they are on
equal terms and so admissible. Where the party making the accusations is the mother of the

victim and no police is present: Parkes v R (1976) 1 WLR 585

A confession is a statement by a person charged stating or suggesting that he has committed the

crime. There is no difference between a full confession and a mere incriminating admission:
Harz [1967] AC 760

Confessions can be written or oral: Jurysingh (1985) LRC 105

A confession could not be given in evidence by the prosecution unless shown by them to be a

voluntary statement in the sense that it was not obtained from the accused by fear of prejudice or
hope of advantage exercised or held out by a person in authority or by oppression: Ibrahim v R

(1914) ASC 599

The test for admissibility of a confession is fairness and voluntariness and the burden is the

criminal standard beyond a reasonable doubt: Shabadine Peart v R [2006] UKPC 5; DPP v Ping

Lin (1975) 3 AER 175 HOL

2