The defendant had refused to comment on allegations put to him when interviewed by the police. His solicitor was present.
Held: After quoting Hall, the court commented: ‘We have reservations about these two statements of law because they seem to conflict with Christie and with earlier cases and authorities . . The law has long accepted that an accused person is not bound to incriminate himself; but it does not follow that a failure to answer an accusation or question when an answer could reasonably be expected may not provide some evidence in support of an accusation. Whether it does will depend upon the circumstances.’ and ‘It would be unfortunate if the law of evidence was allowed to develop in a way which was not in accordance with the common sense of ordinary folk. We are bound by Christie and not by Hall: and Christie, in our judgment, does accord with common sense.’
Judges:
Lawton LJ
Citations:
(1975) 63 Cr App R 1
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Not followed – Hall v Regina PC 1970
The court asked as to the modern application of the dicta in Christie with regard to the admissibility of false statements made in the presence of a defendant but uncontradicted by him. In this case there had been no positive act to adopt the lie. . .
Cited – Rex v Christie HL 1914
The House considered the admissibility in evidence of a false statement made in the defendant’s presence, but uncontradicted by him: ‘the rule of law undoubtedly is that a statement made in the presence of an accused person, even on an occasion . .
Cited by:
Cited – Collins and Keep v Regina CACD 28-Jan-2004
When arrested with a co-defendant, C had said nothing as his co-defendant gave a false explanation. He now appealed his conviction saying that the judge had left with the jury the question of whether he was adopting that lie by his own silence.
Cited – Regina v Horne CACD 1990
The victim had been ‘glassed’ in a restaurant. Tne defendant was brought before the victim who immediately identified him as the assailant. He made no answer.
Held: The judge was correct to direct the jury to take the defendant’s silence in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Evidence
Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.192658
