A. Bad character evidence
As a general rule, evidence of criminal conduct by the accused, other than those which are subject of the charge, is inadmissible. The basis is that such evidence is usually irrelevant, and even if relevant, they are usually unfairly prejudicial to the accused.
When is evidence of the defendant’s character admissible?
However, there are limited situations where a defendant’s character may be admissible. A notable example is when the defendant puts his own character at issue by adducing evidence of his good character. Another example is if he or she gives evidence against another co-defendant in the same trial.
There is also an established doctrine called “similar fact evidence” which allows the Court to admit evidence of the defendant’s misconduct or criminal acts other than those related to the offence at trial.
These will be explained in more details in this part.
Court directions
Even when evidence of the defendant’s bad character is admissible, the jury must be directed carefully as to the matter in issue to which such evidence might be relevant and how it might be relevant. The Court must tell the jury that the fact that the defendant had a bad character or the propensity as shown by such evidence does not mean he or she is guilty of the offence charged.
Read Whole Topics
Print
Email
