The Law of Evidence

[Date of Submission]

Introduction3

Discussion3

The Legal Burden, the Standard of proof and the Burden of Proof3

The Ex Parte Mc Curbin4

The Rule in Woolmington Case5

Implied Statutory Exception6

Expressly Statutory Exception6

Insanity6

The Human Right Act7

The Magistrate Court Act 1017

The Three Stage Test8

The Punishment of Five Years9

The General Rule on Compellability and Competence10

The Section 53 (4) and Section 53 (1) and Criminal Evidence Act of 198910

Conclusion11

Law of Evidence

Introduction

Sarah and David is a married couple that has been charged together in the same proceeding. The fact in issue is to advise this married couple as to whether they have any grounds for appeal with respect to compellability and the competence and standard of prove and respect to burden, since Sarah is a co-defendant to David, therefore, she is competent to give evidence not as compellable but as a co-defendant in accordance to the Criminal Evidence Act of 1989.

The judge had directed the jury to be certain, since the prosecution has legal burden as it is a criminal case. However, it is observed that Sarah and David have good grounds for appeal, since the jury was misled and the burden can be reversed to them as they both have to rely on for their defence in accordance to the magistrate Court Act 101. Furthermore, the probability of reverse burden in their case is explored and both of the conditions are argued relational to the consequences, in case if the couple is able or not able to proof the defence.

Discussion

The Legal Burden, the Standard of proof and the Burden of Proof

Since it is a criminal case, the success in burden of proof depends upon the proof or evidence as it is borne by the prosecution. Chances of losing the issue exist, if sufficient evidence is not adduced by the prosecution or the party to support their case. There is several different allocation of the burden of proof since several elements are comprised by a criminal offence. Beyond reasonable doubt, the defendant's guilt is required to be satisfied by the prosecution to the jury in a criminal case in terms of standard of proof. To win on the issue in question, the obligation must be satisfied or discharged, which is in relation to a civil criminal case be scheduled a party within relative to a meticulous subject of reality, is called legal burden.

If the proceedings are criminal, the legal burden is required to be discharged by the standard of proof. Within deference of the vital elements of the crime, the accused bears no legal burden, whether he denies all or any of them or whether them being negative or positive. However, the legal burden prosecution bears the legal burden, since both positive and negative accusations might exist necessary to the trial; hence he must provide lack of the assent scheduled a accusation. If the standard of proof or burden of proof is misdirected by the judge, an appeal is likely to lead.

Without the application of burden of proof of the common place, no lawsuit can be ...