Question 1

The Government in 1994 rejected a million pound report produced by the Royal Commission in 2003 in order to introduce controversial legislation on drawing inferences from a D's silence Despite widespread opposition including a report commissioned by the Government, costing taxpayers millions, the Government wanted to balance PACE by being tough on silent criminals.

Accepted Answer

The first line of the text states that "The Government in 1994 rejected a million pound report produced by the Royal Commission in 2003". This means that the government did not accept the report, which is the opposite of what the question asks.

Question 2

What type of officers are included under S34? The questioning of a suspect, in which a caution is give, can be made by any of the officers. Store Detectives, depending on their contract of employment, can also fall under this bracket.

Accepted Answer

A, B, C, D

Question 3

Under S35, in which circumstances can inferences be drawn from the defedants silence? After strong opposition from A,B,C the Government, wanting to be tough on crime, used D's report 22 years earlier in order to produce legislation that made it necessary to convict criminals who remined silent

Accepted Answer

A, C

Question 4

Which of the following bodies opinions did the Government reject when reforming the law on the right to silence in 1994? After strong opposition from A,B,C the Government, wanting to be tough on crime, used D's report 22 years earlier in order to produce legislation that made it necessary to convict criminals who remined silent

Accepted Answer

The passage states that the Government rejected the opinions of A,B,C, indicating that they were not in favor of the proposed legislation on the right to silence. The Government relied on D's report from 22 years earlier to produce the law, suggesting that it was more aligned with the Government's goals.

Question 5

When can adverse inferences be drawn from a defendants silence? Inferences can be drawn from all of these, as stated under S34-37 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

Accepted Answer

Adverse inferences can be drawn from a defendant's silence during a trial, failure to mention a fact later relied upon in court, failure to account for a mark, and failure to account for their presence at a particular place under S34-37 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. Thus, all the given choices are correct.

Question 6

Which country had the UK Governemnt followed in introducing legislation that allowed infernces to be drawn from a defendant's silence? Identical provisions outlined in S34-37 were introduced some six years earlier in Northern Ireland.

Accepted Answer

The passage states that the UK Government followed another country's lead in introducing legislation allowing inferences to be drawn from a defendant's silence, and that identical provisions were introduced in Northern Ireland six years earlier. Therefore, the best choice is A) Northern Ireland. The passage does not mention Scotland, the USA, or Wales as having introduced such legislation.

Question 7

According to R v Condron and Condron, S34 is compatible with which Article of the ECHR? The courts held, that provided appropriate safeguards were put in place, an accused's silence could be taken into account when assessing the persuasiveness of the evidence adduced by the prosecution against him.

Accepted Answer

Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) guarantees the right to a fair trial, which includes the right to remain silent. However, the European Court of Human Rights has recognized that this right is not absolute and can be restricted in certain circumstances. In R v Condron and Condron, the courts held that section 34 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (which allows for an adverse inference to be drawn from a suspect's silence) was compatible with Article 6 of the ECHR, as long as appropriate safeguards were put in place. Therefore, the best choice is A) Art 6.

Question 8

S10 PACE 1984 gives which relationship the right of professional privilege? A lawyer may refuse to answer questions about advice given to clients - this is to facilitate honest communication between them

Accepted Answer

S10 PACE 1984 gives the right of professional privilege to lawyers, allowing them to refuse to answer questions about advice given to clients. This is meant to facilitate honest communication between lawyers and clients, ensuring that clients can trust their lawyers to keep their communication confidential. Other professions such as doctors, priests, and company directors do have ethical guidelines and confidentiality obligations, but they do not have the same legal right of professional privilege as lawyers under S10 PACE.

Question 9

Inferences may be drawn if a suspect is relying on facts given under a written statement to police who remained silent during questioning. The purpose of S34 (1)a was to prevent a suspect from relying on facts in court that should have been disclised during police questioning. If all of the facts that are being relied upon are in the written statement produced by the solicitor, inferences cannot be drawn by the jury.

Accepted Answer

Under Section 34(1)(a) of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, inferences can indeed be drawn if a suspect fails to mention during questioning something they later rely on in court, even if these facts were included in a written statement. The purpose is to encourage suspects to disclose their defense early.

Question 10

No conviction may be made solely on the inferences drawn under Section 35. Stated in S38 (3) CJPOA 1994

Accepted Answer

Section 38(3) of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 states that "No such inference may be drawn if the court considers that the evidence as a whole is inconsistent with the theory on which it is based." Therefore, a conviction cannot be solely based on inferences drawn under Section 35 of the CJPOA 1994.

Question 11

There is no longer a privilege against self-incrimination in Civil Proceedings Section 14 (1) Civil Evidence Act 1968 stipulates that a witness may refuse to answer any question that would expose them or their spouse/civil partner to crominal proceedings.

Accepted Answer

The statement is incorrect as it contradicts the actual provision of Section 14 (1) Civil Evidence Act 1968. The provision grants a privilege against self-incrimination in civil proceedings and allows a witness to refuse to answer questions that may incriminate themselves or their spouse/civil partner in criminal proceedings.

Question 12

The rule of even terms is still applicable under English common law This is seen in the recent case of Barry George - he denied murder twice when asked by a customer at his local hairdressers. It was reasonable to expect a denial of the accusation.

Accepted Answer

The statement mentions the rule of even terms, which is a principle of English common law that requires a witness to give either an affirmative or negative response to a question asked in court. In the given scenario, the rule of even terms is applied when Barry George denies murder twice when asked by a customer at his local hairdresser. As his denial was expected, it shows the applicability of the rule of even terms under English common law.

Question 13

Inferences can be drawn from a suspects silence even where he or she has not recevied legal advice. The court in Murray v UK held that the denial of legal advice breached Art 6 of the ECHR. S58 YKCEA 1999 now provides that no inferences can be drawn if the accused was in police detention and did not have prior access to a solicitor.

Accepted Answer

Under s58 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (YJCEA 1999), it is specifically provided that adverse inferences cannot be drawn from silence if the accused has not been allowed an opportunity to consult with a solicitor during police detention. This provision aims to protect the rights of the accused under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), particularly in light of the decision in Murray v. UK, which highlighted the importance of legal advice in ensuring a fair trial under Article 6 of the ECHR.

Question 14

There must have been questioning under a police caution for inferences to be drawn. As stated under Code C, Para 10.4 of PACE 1984.

Accepted Answer

According to Code C, Para 10.4 of PACE 1984, inferences can only be drawn from a suspect's silence during questioning if they have been cautioned by the police beforehand.

Question 15

The principle of the right to silence in entrenched into the legal systems of which jurisdictions? In the common law world, few jurisdictions mirror the English approach. The USA , South Afirca and Canada have the principle enshrined in their Constitutions respectively.

Accepted Answer

Northern Ireland is not a jurisdiction in and of itself, but rather a constituent country within the United Kingdom. However, the United Kingdom as a whole does have a right to silence in its legal system. Therefore, the correct choices are A (USA), C (South Africa), and D (Canada), as they have the principle of the right to silence entrenched in their respective constitutions.

Quiz 6: The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination