Evidence Law Assignment:

This paper circulates around the core theme of Evidence Law Assignment: together with its essential aspects. It has been reviewed and purchased by the majority of students thus, this paper is rated 4.8 out of 5 points by the students. In addition to this, the price of this paper commences from £ 99. To get this paper written from the scratch, order this assignment now. 100% confidential, 100% plagiarism-free.

Evidence Law Assignment:

Topic:  “Factual accuracy is the most important requirement in considering admissibility and overshadows arguments about moral standing or legitimacy.

Show understanding on s78 PACE:

What are the rule and principles of courts discretion

Situations where a stay of prosecution is appropriate and those when evidence may be excluded

And american position on these matters

 Review considerations that court bear on exclusion of evidence obtained by police tricks, or by breaches of primary or delegated legisalation CODE C, D of PACE!

Strategy

Introduction:   Show understanding on s78 PACE;

 as well as we know, not a right based stuff, but more to a reliance;

1^st : situation when exclusion is appropriate

2: wat are the rules and principles

3, review on police works

What s78 gives out tends to be reliability-centralized discretion, but not right based; especially with the involvement of science and technology in investigative and trial processes, such as DNA evidence, and covert bugs and surveillance.  In Cooke[1], the court has refused to exclude the DNA evidence although it is obtained improperly; moreover, the court willingness in accepting evidence based on factual accuracy can also be seen from the acceptance of covert bugs and surveillance evidence, which of course produce reliable and compelling evidence of guilt.

this has been criticized for a very long period(over the last 20 ears), as the court tend to give fairness a rather out-of expectation meaning and application, than what the public think

 As in here, the court has pinpointing more on factual accuracy, whereby the evidence, regardless of its legitimacy, is to be considered more on its accurate facts, than moral standing. This, howsoever bring justice much on the table, but however  intimidates the moral standing of the judiciary, as it is quoted that the trial is not merly about reliably convicting the gility and ensuring the protection of the innocent, but it is important that judicial responsibility to maintain the moral integrity of the process[2]

Bennet’s Act is the major turning point for the acknowledgement of impropriety towards payment and pardon as methods used to secure reliable evidence against suspected criminals. However, such methods still existed today, only with low visibility and are subjected to minimal supervisory control[3], where useful information is bought from informers, either with money or with promises of preferential or lenient treatment. With the enactment of the PACE, there is a clear and indisputable authority for a judicial discretion to exclude evidence.

Loosely and AG reference of 2003:

 Our society is full of temptation, and for a society with temptation of this, it could be very common if one to be promised or tempted by a big fortune and done something illegal, and therefore, it is not fair for them. It is stated that individual should not be subjected to tempetaion created by those official if there is no reasonable grounds, and they were not provide more that an unexceptional opportunity to commit the offence…