Evidence of Evil Propensity
| Author | H. A. Hammelmann |
| Date | 01 January 1949 |
| Published date | 01 January 1949 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1949.tb00106.x |
THE
MODERN
LAW REVIEW
~~~
Volume
12
January
1949
No.
1
EVIDENCE
OF
EVIL PROPENSITY
A
NOTE
ON
R.
ti.
Sims
IT
is common ground that the mixture of common law with statute-
made law which distinguishes the English legal system shows itself
in the least favourable light in the sphere
of
the so-called adjective
law, the law relating to procedure and evidence. Our rules of
evidence have grown in
a
haphazard way
:
judges in their decisions
and the Legislature 'in its occasional excursions into this field have
been concerned less with the establishment of a systematic and
coherent body of law than with
a
sensible ad hoc solution of certain
definite problems. Unfortunately, some rules of evidence, as,
e.g.,
the rule against hearsay evidence, have in tke process become
so
complicated and overgrown with exceptions thbt nothing short of
a
decisive step of the Legislature seems now capable
of
unravelling
the tangle.
In such circumstances, every effort
of
the higher Courts to clear
the field,
or
at
least
a
sectioh
of
it, of such growths in the shape of
decided cases as have come
to
obscure
or,
indeed, entirely
to
over-
shadow the trunk of the tree, may become an extremely daring and
even hazardous venture. The basic principles having sometimes
been lost to sight,
a
cool analysis of available precedents is bound
to reveal contrasts and conflicting decisions which are extremely
dimcult to reconcile. Any attempt
to
re-state the principles
is
likely
to meet with the objection that it is revolutionary, unjustifiable and
bad law.
Into such
a
thicket the Lord Chief Justice ventured when he took
the-surely laudable-resolve to tackle the question of admissibility
of evidence of similar acts and bad disposition in the recent case of
R.
v.
Sims.
Fortunately,
it
cannot
be
said that he blundered into
the matter,
for
on the hearing
of
the application for leave to appeal
Lord Goddard determined, in view
of
the importance
of
the question
involved, to arrange for a court of five judges to hear the appeal.
Nor
were the facts of the case in any way complicated
:
Sims was
charged on an indictment containing a number of counts, including
three which alleged buggery with three different men and another
gross indecency with a fourth man. He was found guilty
of
buggery
with the three men, and acquitted of gross indecency with the fourth.
An application for separate trials in respect of each separate man
1
*
[1946]
K.B.
631.
VOL.
12
.
I
To continue reading
Request your trial