Regina v Mitchell: 1892

The court gave the following direction to the jury as to the way in which they should treat the response of the accused to an accusation made in his presence: ‘Now the whole admissibility of statements of this kind rests upon the consideration that if a charge is made against a person in that person’s presence, it is reasonable to expect that he or she will immediately deny it, and that the absence of such a denial is some evidence of an admission on the part of the person charged, and of the truth of the charge. Undoubtedly when persons are speaking on equal terms and a charge is made, and a person says nothing, and expresses no indignation and does nothing to repel the charge, that is some evidence to show that he admits the charge to be true.’

Judges:

Cave J

Citations:

(1892) 17 Cox CC 503

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedCollins 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.
AppliedParkes v Regina PC 1976
The court considered whether to admit as evidence against the accused his response to an accusation made by the victim’s mother when no police officer was present and to which the defendant had reacted by threatening her. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.192657