Similarly, in a magistrates court trial this will be taken into account by the magistrates or District Judge. This is known as the good character direction and, where appropriate, a judge in the Crown Court will give both limbs of this direction to the jury. their good character may make it less likely that they acted as alleged). In considering, by reason of their good character, the likelihood of them having committed the offence (i.e. This is only relevant where there is actually some evidence from the defendant for the jury or magistrates to consider, such as where the defendant has given evidence at trial or made a statement before the trial, such as in a police interview and
their good character may make it more likely that they can be believed). In support of the credibility of their evidence (i.e.
In a criminal trial the good character of a defendant is relevant in two ways: The Good Character Direction - how evidence of good character is used in court You can read more about each category below. There may also be situations where the only blemish on a defendant’s character is an old, minor conviction which is irrelevant to whatever he or she is now on trial for, such as a 30 year old charged with assault who has only one previous conviction for shoplifting when he was 16.įor these reasons, good character is now broken down into the following categories:Ībsolute good character - a person with no previous convictions or cautions and no ‘reprehensible behaviour’ alleged, admitted or proved against them Įffective good character - where a defendant has old, minor and irrelevant previous convictions or cautions. Although the defendant may not have any previous convictions or cautions, it would seem bizarre to a jury to describe him as a man of ‘good character’. ( Reprehensible behaviour is part of the legal definition of Bad Character.)įor example, in a case where a defendant is charged with raping his wife, there may be other evidence not specifically charged of the defendant’s tyrranical behaviour at home, both towards his wife and children. In criminal cases, ‘good character’ was often used to describe a defendant who had no criminal convictions or cautions, although this concept of good character could be undermined where there was evidence of other ‘reprehensible behaviour’ on their part, such as previous criminal conduct (other than that which the defendant was on trial for) which was never charged, or other poor behaviour. If a defendant on trial is a person of good character, they will want to use this to support their case, to demonstrate that they are a person who should be believed and a person who would be less likely to involve themselves in criminal conduct.
0 kommentar(er)
