Criminal Law 2 - what is a crime? - Presumption of Innocence – classification - Presumption of Innocence – Reversal of Burden of Proof Exam – PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE (6/10) - presumption of innocence can be asked as an ‘a’ or ‘b’ question - or can be asked as a general presumption of innocence question 1, 2020 - or can be asked specifically about the presumption of innocence and reverse onus provisions or situations in where the accused is required to prove a defence, Q6 2019 Intro – always mention that your client enjoys a presumption of innocence and the burden is on the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Body – 1. Explain that the presumption of innocence is a part of the right to a fair trial as per Woolmington and O’Leary v AG, and as guaranteed by the Constitution (find out which article) and Art 6 ECHR 2. In order for the prosecution to get a conviction they must rebut the presumption of innocence. If the prosecution fails to do such, then the accused is acquitted. 3. Prosecution (generally) must prove all elements of its case on a standard of proof beyond all reasonable doubt. 4. Exceptions to the general principle – special defences such as insanity, diminished responsibility, where the accused must prove his defence on the civil standard of balance of probabilities (51%) 5. Other exception to the general principle is the revere onus provision as in O’Leary, Hardy, Forsey Exam – CHARACTERISITCS OF A CRIME (8/10) - both essay or problem question - advise on either the classification of crimes or advise on the characteristics of crimes - March 2019 Q was set out as a problem question but it was in fact an essay question on the classification of offences in Ireland. Significant HC decision 8/06/2022 – CW -v- Ireland - Applicant challenged the constitutionality of Section 3 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2006 as substituted by Section 17 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017. - Section 3 of the 2006 Act makes it an offences to engage or attempt to engage in a sexual act with a child under the age of 17, but Section 3.3 provides a defence where the accused proves that he/she was reasonably mistaken that at the time of the alleged offence, the child was 17 years of age. - Section 3.5 provides that the standard of proof was on the balance of probabilities (as civil wrongs). - Stack J struck down Section 3.5 as unconstitutional as it placed a legal burden on an accused to prove he was reasonably mistaken as to the age on the balance of probabilities. - Stack J referred to Hardy, Smyth, Heffernan and Forsey and held that the imposition of S.3.5 of a civil standard of proof places a legal burden on an accused on an issue which is central to his guilt and is therefore a breach of the presumption of innocence.
