Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Australian Law and The Right to Silence. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This is a 14 page Australian Law paper. Weissensteiner v R (1993) 17 CLR 217 descirbes the right to silence, with a specific view of the right of the accused to elect to remain silent and the implications in terms of the legal process. Specifically, the right to silence cannot be used by the prosecution in support of an implied admission of guilt, and cannot be used as evidence to support either guilt or innocence. Bibliography lists 5 sources.
Page Count:
14 pages (~225 words per page)
File: MH11_MHAusLa4.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
the implications in terms of the legal process. Specifically, the right to silence cannot be used by the prosecution in support of an implied admission of guilt, and cannot
be used as evidence to support either guilt or innocence. At the same time, the right to silence can be assessed when it bears upon the probative value of
the evidence, and this is the only case in which the jury is required to consider or place emphasis on the use of silence when considering the evidence. In
other words, if the accuseds choice to remain silent prevents further exploration into specific elements of evidence, then this choice to remain silent inherently influences the views of the evidence
and a consequence of this is that the accuseds silence is then considered in the trial process. In understanding the rationale and arguments
surrounding the value placed on the right to silence and the arguments against using the right to silence as an implied admission of guilt, it is necessary to relate some
of the central views presented in Australian law and determine the implications of the right to silence in the legal process. In conjunction, it is also necessary to understand
the specific context of the claims of the impact of silence on the probative value of evidence, as related in Weissensteiner VR (1993) 17 CLR 217. Because of the
long-standing application of the right to silence, first recognized in R. v Kops (1893), there is a need to consider the fine line that can determine the maintaining of the
right to silence and the implications for jury deliberations and in the choice of exercising this right (Aroson and Hunter, 1998). The Common Law and Silence
...