Reconceptualising good character
| Author | Nicola Monaghan |
| DOI | 10.1177/1365712715589468 |
| Published date | 01 July 2015 |
| Date | 01 July 2015 |
| Subject Matter | Case Note |
Case Note
Reconceptualising good
character: Hunter vR;Saruwu
vR;Johnstone vR;Walker vR;
Lonsdale vR
Nicola Monaghan
Independent Researcher, Hertfordshire, UK
Abstract
This case note concerns the recent decision of the Court of Appeal in Hunter vR;Saruwu vR;
Johnstone vR;Walker vR;Lonsdale vR. The Court of Appeal clearly intended this decision to
be the leading authority on the nature and extent of good character directions. The court
took the opportunity to conduct a comprehensive review of the law, and concluded that the
principles of good character had been extended too far so that defendants with bad criminal
records or those not entitled to good character directions were claiming entitlement to such
directions. This led to a significant increase in applications for leave to appeal against the good
character directions given by trial judges. The problem with the principles of good character
arose in light of the wider definition given to the term ‘bad character’ under the Criminal
Justice Act 2003, and this inevitably necessitated a reconsideration of the scope of good
character directions. Thus, the court sought to reconceptualise good character, categorising
defendants into those of ‘absolute good character’, ‘effective good character’ and ‘bad
character’, and held that whether a defendant is one of effective good character or whether a
defendant of bad character is entitled to good character directions are matters for the trial
judge’s discretion. It is argued that this is a welcome decision which will likely eliminate the
recent practice of defence counsel manipulating good character principles to coax trial judges
into endorsing the defence case.
Keywords
character evidence, good character, jury directions, Vye directions
Corresponding author:
Nicola Monaghan, Independent Researcher, Hertfordshire, UK.
Email: nicolamonaghan@hotmail.co.uk
The International Journalof
Evidence & Proof
2015, Vol. 19(3) 190–195
ªThe Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1365712715589468
epj.sagepub.com
To continue reading
Request your trial