Police Probationer Training Programme PDF - Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency

OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4...

OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency Lesson Aim: The learner will be able to explain the concept of sufficiency of evidence Learning Outcomes: On successful completion of the lesson, Introduction students will be able to:- In recent years, advances in technology and science have significantly enhanced 1. Explain the term sufficiency of evidence traditional methods of detecting criminals. The introduction of:- 2. Explain what is meant by best evidence DNA testing in respect of two or more eye witnesses Advanced forensic techniques CCTV 3. Identify the corroborative evidence Intelligence led policing required to support the evidence of one eye witness have all assisted the police in fighting crime. 4. Explain what is meant by circumstantial This lesson deals with evidence and in evidence particular the sufficiency of evidence to prove a criminal case. 5. Explain the elements that would provide sufficient circumstantial evidence to convict, in the absence of eye witnesses 1 th Amended 24 April 2024 v.5 OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency Sufficiency of Evidence To prove the guilt of an accused, the evidence presented must not only be deemed to be admissible by the court (i.e. competent), but there must also be enough of it. In other words there must be sufficient, admissible evidence, to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crime or offence libelled Key Information KI This involves the principle of corroboration which means that one piece of evidence must be backed up by another piece of evidence. It is the responsibility of the police to gather all available evidence and present it to the court. Eye Witnesses Two or More Eye Witnesses An accused can be found guilty on the separate testimony of two or more credible eye witnesses who saw the accused commit the crime or offence. This type of eye witness evidence is the best evidence and as such should be led first. Other forms of evidence can be led after eye witnesses have given their evidence. The courts will not normally accept the testimony of a single eye witness, no matter how credible, as being proven truth, unless:- There is further evidence provided by either a second witness or equivalent evidence provided by the circumstances to support the testimony of the first witness (circumstantial evidence) It is sufficient for conviction if there are two witnesses whom the court believes, irrespective of the number of contradictory witnesses whose evidence is disbelieved. Note:- The exception to this rule is Section 21 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 which provides that only one eye witness is necessary to prove a variety of traffic offences, e.g. parking offences, obstruction, excise offences and failure to obey traffic signs or signals. 2 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency Only One Eye Witness There are many occasions when crimes occur in the presence of only one eye witness. In such cases an accused cannot be convicted on the evidence of a single eye witness alone because of the lack of corroboration. If, however, the police can gather together other facts and circumstances, which jointly amount to evidence equivalent to a second eye witness, then corroboration may be achieved. No Eye Witness In some cases the prosecution find that there are no eye witnesses to the commission of a crime. This is very common in crimes of dishonesty or in very serious cases, e.g. murder, when the culprit first ensures that there are no witnesses. The prosecution would then have to rely on circumstantial evidence alone to prove the case. Such facts and circumstances are referred to as circumstantial evidence (you may also hear this referred to as indirect evidence). Scenario S At 0930 hours, Betty Robertson aged 83 years, collects her pension from the local Post Office in Culzean Gardens, Brookbank. As she leaves the post office she puts £70 cash in her purse and starts to walk home. Suddenly, a woman runs up behind her, grabs the purse with the cash and runs off. The police attend immediately and investigate the incident. They manage to ascertain that the £70 is made up of six £10 notes and two £5 notes all recently obtained from the Post Office. Mrs Robertson, although shocked, was able to describe the culprit as female, early twenties, with dark hair, wearing blue denim jeans. It is alleged she made off onto nearby waste ground. At 1020 hours, same date, the police trace Suzanne Smith aged 24 years, running away from the waste land. She has dark brown hair and is wearing blue denim jeans. 3 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency Scenario Continued S The police stop and speak to her and find that she is in possession of six £10 notes and two £5 notes, but is not in possession of the purse or any other money. The notes are all ‘Royal Bank’ notes. Smith, who is unemployed, is not willing to explain where she obtained this money. Her bank account is with the ‘Savings Bank’. The purse is found on the waste ground, minus the money. Activity 1 A1 In your group have a look at the Brookbank scenario:- List the elements of this incident you feel are important strands of evidence As part of your wider investigation where else might you gather further evidence List the elements of this incident you feel are important strands of evidence 4 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency Key Information KI On many occasions you will be the first to arrive at the scene of a crime. While it is important to circulate the suspect’s description and direction of travel, it is equally important to help and assist the victim in whatever way is deemed appropriate. By doing so you will be forging trust and co-operation, which will be advantageous to your investigation. What is Circumstantial Evidence? The term “circumstantial”, in a criminal case, denotes that form of evidence afforded by facts or circumstances which have an apparent relation to the crime and from which an inference may be drawn as to the guilt, or innocence, of the accused person. Elements of Circumstantial Evidence An accused can still be convicted if the prosecution can lay before the court sufficient circumstantial evidence which forms an unbroken cable, the material facts and circumstances of which, point to the guilt of the accused. In the comparison with a cable, each fact and circumstance, inferring the guilt of the accused, acts as an additional strand to the cable. The more strands contained in the cable, the more corroboration is secured and the stronger the cable becomes. The cable is, of course, the case for the prosecution. 5 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency Feedback 1 F1 By themselves, each strand of evidence would be insufficient. Smith could easily explain each fact and circumstance away. For example:- She won £70 on a horse She was running because she was late The Bookie was a ‘Royal Bank’ customer Some other person discarded the empty purse However the more facts and circumstances there are to infer the guilt of the accused, the more difficult it is for them to be explained away by the defence. If the prosecution could show to the satisfaction of the court that:- She was found near to the scene of the crime She matched the description of the Thief She was found in possession of the same amount of money stolen from the woman That the money found on her was the same bank notes and denomination The discarded purse was recovered from the waste ground on which she was found then you can see that all these circumstances would jointly corroborate Betty Robertson’s witness testimony. In such a case, a conviction would be likely, particularly if Mrs Robertson subsequently identifies Smith. Don’t forget DNA, fingerprints, CCTV, or house to house investigations at the scene. This could prove to be valuable corroborative evidence. 6 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency MAGICOP As a guide, if the following types of circumstantial evidence are all present the prosecution is likely to secure a conviction against an accused:- Motive Accused was motivated to commit crime through greed, revenge, malice etc. Ability Accused had the skills or strength etc. necessary to commit crime. Guilty Intent Accused acted with the intention of committing the crime, e.g. an opportunist thief stealing an unattended handbag. Identification Forensic evidence, DNA, fingerprints fibres etc. Conduct after the Crime Evidence that the accused has disposed of incriminating evidence, or actions after the incident i.e. running away, concealing identity etc. Opportunity Evidence that the accused was at or near the locus at the time, or had privileged access etc. Preparation Evidence that the accused purchased a weapon or obtained housebreaking tools in preparation to commit the crime etc. 7 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency Not all of these strands must be present but the fewer strands, the weaker the case. The central strand of identification must always be present or the case will fall. Each piece of circumstantial evidence must be proved by evidence from a witness or witnesses regarding its relationship to the case under review, e.g. when a fingerprint is discovered the officer should obtain corroboration from a colleague to testify to its position, etc. Proof of Separate Incidents The principles of proof of separate incidents is known as the MOOROV Doctrine and HOWDEN Principle. Moorov Doctrine The evidence of one witness alone is normally insufficient. However, in the right circumstances the evidence of separate witnesses can be corroborative if there is a sufficient similarity and connection between the incidents to reasonably and safely infer that the crimes are linked and committed by the same person. In essence:- 1. Two or more crimes or offences which are committed by the same offender, but 2. Where only one eye witness is available for each crime (Moorov v HMA 1930 SLT 596) It is most often used in cases of indecency. Howden Principle This relates to similar offences that have occurred but the identification strand is not available for every crime or offence. If there is identification of an accused for one offence and the circumstances of the other offences are deemed to be so similar then it is possible that the accused may be convicted e.g. theft by housebreaking. (Howden v HMA 1994 SCCR 19) 8 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency Scenario S Crime A At 2230hrs, Mary Wallace walks, unaccompanied, past Woodlea Drive, Brookbank when from behind a tree steps a man. Mary describes him as being about 24 years, tall, with light brown shoulder length hair, wearing a brown raincoat. As Mary passes the man, he pulls back his coat and indecently exposes himself, before running away. Mary reports the incident and gives the police a full statement. Crime B About 2245hrs, three days later Jane Dawes is walking, unaccompanied, past Woodlea Drive, Brookbank. From behind a bush, steps a man. Jane describes him as being in his early 20s, about 6ft tall, with long blonde hair, wearing a brown raincoat. As Jane approaches the man pulls back his coat and indecently exposes himself, before running away. Jane also reports the incident to the police. As a result of the police enquiry, Jones is traced as a possible suspect for crimes ‘A’ and ‘B’. Both Mary and Jane separately identify Jones in an Identification Parade. 9 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency Activity 2 A2 In your groups, discuss the Moorov Doctrine and Howden Principle in relation to these scenarios. Which, if either, applies in this case? Explain your reasoning. 10 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency Feedback 2 F2 As you can see crimes have occurred which have been reported to the police. When you compare the circumstances of the two crimes the similarities are obvious:- Time Location Crime circumstance Description of the culprit Identification Mary and Jane are witnesses to separate crimes but the circumstances are very similar. They have both separately identified Jones, because of the similarity of the two separate statements, statement ‘A’ is corroborated by statement ‘B’, and vice versa. This is an example of the Moorov Doctrine in practice. 11 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency For further information, use the resources shown below:- Legal Database:- Evidence - Amount of Proof Review: You can explain the term sufficiency of evidence You can explain what is meant by best evidence in respect of two or more eye witnesses You can identify the corroborative evidence required to support the evidence of one eye witness You can explain what is meant by circumstantial evidence You can explain the elements that would provide sufficient circumstantial evidence to convict, in the absence of eye witnesses 12 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency Learning Log: How will what you have learned in this module impact your day-to- day role? Are there any skills or knowledge you would like to develop further following this module? End of Module 13 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL  OFFICIAL Unit 3 Lesson 4 Sufficiency 14 Scots Criminal Law: Police Powers and Principles of Evidence OFFICIAL