PrivacyCopyright and Disclaimer SitemapFeedbackHelpSearch
Home
About Us
Recent News
Current Projects
Publications - Active
Digest
Contribute to Law Reform
Law Reform Links
Contact Us
Where am I now? Lawlink > Law Reform Commission > Publications > Report 95 (2000) - The right to silence

Report 95 (2000) - The right to silence


Contents

Terms of reference
Participants
List of recommendations

1. INTRODUCTION
THE COMMISSION’S REFERENCE
THE RIGHT TO SILENCE IN NEW SOUTH WALES
CONDUCT OF THE REFERENCE
STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT

2. THE RIGHT TO SILENCE WHEN QUESTIONED BY POLICE
HISTORY OF THE RIGHT TO SILENCE WHEN QUESTIONED BY POLICE
THE LAW IN NEW SOUTH WALES
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
Petty v The Queen
Exceptions
How often suspects remain silent
Covert police investigations
Other police powers
Royal Commission into the New South Wales Police Service
Statutory abrogation
Concealing serious offences
OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Constitutional protection
Modification to permit adverse inferences

      When silence can lead to adverse inferences
      The types of adverse inferences available
      How often suspects remain silent
      Serious fraud
MODIFYING THE RIGHT TO SILENCE WHEN QUESTIONED BY POLICE
Previous inquiries into the right to silence when questioned by police
      Australia
      United Kingdom
Analysis of the case for modifying the right to silence when questioned by police
      Exploited by offenders
      Efficiency
      Trade off for other protections
      The need to guide juries
The case against modifying the right to silence when questioned by police
      England and Wales
      Reasons for silence consistent with innocence
      Fundamental principles
      International law
The Commission’s recommendation

3. PRE-TRIAL DISCLOSURE
PRE-TRIAL DISCLOSURE IN NEW SOUTH WALES
Common law
Disclosure by police to the prosecution
Prosecution disclosure

      Service of briefs
      Committal hearings
      Barristers’ and Solicitors’ Rules
      DPP Prosecution Guidelines
      Subpoenas
Defence disclosure
      Alibi evidence
      Substantial impairment by abnormality of mind
      Defence opening address
Reciprocal disclosure by the prosecution and the defence
      Expert evidence
      Tendency, coincidence and first-hand hearsay evidence
      Supreme Court Practice Directions
PRE-TRIAL DISCLOSURE IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Australia
      Victoria
      Western Australia
      Northern Territory, South Australia, Tasmania, Australian Capital Territory
      Queensland
England, Wales, Northern Ireland
      Reciprocal disclosure regime
      Serious, complex or long cases
United States
Canada
REFORM OF PRE-TRIAL DISCLOSURE
Submissions
Previous inquiries and proposals for reform
      Australia
      United Kingdom
      Proposal by the Premier and Attorney General of New South Wales
      Law Council of Australia proposal
      National Legal Aid/Directors of Public Prosecution Best Practice Model for the Determination of Indictable Offences
      Law Reform Commission of Western Australia
      Federal Government Working Group
Arguments for reform of prosecution pre-trial disclosure
      Fair trial
      Efficiency
Arguments against prosecution pre-trial disclosure
      Reasons for non-compliance
The Commission’s view
Arguments for reform of defence pre-trial disclosure
      Fair trial
      Efficiency
Arguments against defence pre-trial disclosure
      Fundamental principle
      Lawyer’s duty to client
      Limits on prosecution contact with disclosed witnesses
      Reasons for non-disclosure or departure from disclosed case
      Resources
      Sanctions
The Commission’s view
      Disclosure of alibi evidence
      Other defence disclosure requirements
Scope
Relevant jurisdictions
Timetable
Consequences of non-compliance with the disclosure duties
Restricted use of information disclosed to the defence
Procedural considerations
Disclosure as a mitigating factor

4. THE RIGHT TO SILENCE AT TRIAL
HISTORY OF THE RIGHT TO SILENCE AT TRIAL
THE LAW IN NEW SOUTH WALES
Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)
Common law
How often defendants remain silent at trial
OTHER JURISDICTIONS
Australia
Canada
England, Wales
REFORM OF THE RIGHT TO SILENCE AT TRIAL
Previous inquiries into the right to silence at trial

      Australia
      United Kingdom
Discussion of the legislation in England and Wales
The case for drawing adverse inferences from silence at trial
      Relevant evidence
      The need to guide juries
      Differences between silence when questioned by police and silence at trial
The case against drawing adverse inferences from silence at trial
      Reasons for silence consistent with innocence
      Fundamental principles
The Commission’s recommendation
Prosecution comment

APPENDICIES
APPENDIX A: Submissions received
APPENDIX B: Consultations
APPENDIX C: Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (Eng) sections 34-38

TABLE OF LEGISLATION
TABLE OF CASES
SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY
INDEX



Previous Page | Back to Lawlink Home | Top of Page
  Last updated 28 May 2001   Crown Copyright 2002 ©  
Hosted by
Lawlink NSW