The criminal trial at common law takes seriously safeguards for the right of the accused Discuss with reference to the presumption of innocence and the privilege against self incrimination in common law.

Authors Avatar

Q) The criminal trial at common law takes seriously safeguards for the right of the accused

Discuss with reference to the presumption of innocence and the privilege against self incrimination in common law.

The true course of justices never run smoothly, when a crime is committed the perpetrator is to be arrested and locked up. After all that’s how it suppose to be. But for the right of the accused to be safeguarded, we need to ask the question, was the presumption of innocence and the privilege against self incrimination of the accused adhered to or put into consideration, giving room for due process.

Firstly, what is the presumption of innocence? This is a broad term and can be defined in different ways or manners. One simple definition is the innocence of the accused before proven guilty by a court of law. In further explanation, an accused is not guilty until he is tried a law court beyond reasonable doubt. According to Viscount Sankey in Woolmington v.DPP, he said “No matter what the charge or where the trial, the principle that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the prisoner is part of the common law of England and no attempt to whittle it down can be entertained”this is so important for the prosecutors to prove their case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, meaning if there is a doubt created by the prosecutor, the accused is entitle to an acquittal, because any attempt from the prosecution to “whittle it down will not be entertained”as it is a safeguard measure for the accused and for the presiding judge  not to send an innocent person to jail and free a criminal. In the speech above, Viscount Sankey in Woolmington v. DPP, he made us understand that the whole burden of prove lies with the prosecutor as they must prove that the accused is capable of committing the crime both his mental and physical status must be prove. This is so because in the common law system, “the court does not act inquisitorially” therefore for the jury to make the right decision both the defence and prosecuting counsel must bring forth their evidence and the judge will “act as a neutral umpire” according to Lord Bingham in McIntosh v. Lord Advocate, he said and I quote “the more serious the crime and the greater the public interest in securing conviction of the guilty” , this reminds me of a particular child who died as a result of child abuse. The case of Peter Connelly also known as baby P shocked the whole nation and brought a huge public interest probably due to the magnitude of the injuries. The interest of the public grew wild in securing justices for the convicted. The child might suffer severe damages, if the prosecuting counsel could not prove their case beyond reasonable doubt; the accused is therefore entitled to an acquittal. Lord Bingham in McIntosh v. Lord Advocate further expressed that “the presumption of innocence, which serves not only to protect a particular person on trial, but to maintain public confidence in the enduring integrity and security of the legal system” in order for the public to have confidence in the legal system of the nation, the court must preserve the integrity of the legal system. In other words they must acknowledge and take into account and follow the due process procedure without any bias or abuse of power in order to convict the accused.

Join now!

For the presumption of innocence to be complete, we must appreciate the privilege against self incrimination. The privilege against self incrimination ‘confers a freedom to refuse to answer question when the reply might incriminate the person to whom the question is been addressed’. This means that if an accused or suspect is been questioned, the accused or suspect might choose not to answer any question if he or she feels the reply might incriminate him or her in the court of law. Also any evidence, testimonial or statement obtained under compulsion could not be admissible in court. Every accused is ...

This is a preview of the whole essay