The Assizes
| Published date | 01 January 1953 |
| Date | 01 January 1953 |
| DOI | 10.1177/002201835301700103 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
The
Assizes
QUESTIONS
BY
ONE
PRISONER
INVOLVING CHARACTER OF
ANOTHER:
NO SEPARATE
TRIAL
ON CONSPIRACY CHARGES
R. o. Miller
T
HE
fundamental principle
that
it
is
not
normally
relevant to inquire into aman's previous character
by
asking questions which tend to show
that
he has previously
committed some criminal offence apply equally to questions
asked
by
the
defence as to questions asked
by
the
prose-
cution, according to Devlin J.
at
the
Winchester Assizes
in R. v. Miller
(1952,
2
All
E.R.
667).
"There
is, however,
this difference in
the
application of
the
principle," he went
on:
"In
the
case of
the
prosecution, aquestion of this sort
may
be relevant and
at
the
same time prejudicial, and
if
the
court is of
the
opinion
that
the
prejudicial effect outweighs
its relevance, then
it
has
the
power, and, indeed,
the
duty,
to exclude
the
question. Therefore, counsel for the prose-
cution rarely asks such a question. No such limitation
applies to a question asked
by
counsel for
the
defence. His
duty
is to adduce any evidence which is relevant to his own
case
and
assists his client, whether or not
it
prejudices
anyone else". This
matter
arose for discussion in a case in
which three persons were jointly charged with conspiracy.
A,
Band
C were being tried on a charge of conspiracy
to evade duties of Customs payable on
the
importation of
stockings. The defence of Bwas
that
he was
not
concerned
in
the
illegal acts,
but
that
Cmasqueraded as him (B) and
used his (B's) office for their commission.
In
furtherance
of
that
defence
B's
counsel asked a witness for
the
prosecu-
tion whether C was
not
in prison during aperiod when no
illegal importations
had
taken place. Counsel for C
objected to
the
question
and
applied for a new trial.
The first consideration for
the
judge was whether or
not
this question was relevant
and
he held
that
in
the
circumstances
it
was;
it
had
adirect bearing on
the
defence
which was being developed on behalf of B.
In
the
ordinary
2~
To continue reading
Request your trial