Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Woolmington and burden of proof in relation to presumption of innocence. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A paper which considers burden of proof, evidential burden and presumption of innocence in the light of the "golden thread" of Woolmington, recent case law, and the impact of the European Convention of Human Rights. Bibliography lists 9 sources.
Page Count:
8 pages (~225 words per page)
File: JL5_JLwoolm.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
In order to assess the importance of the rule in Woolmington (1935) concerning evidence in relation to burden of proof, it is perhaps useful to look
briefly at the facts of the case itself, and why Lord Sankeys contention regarding presumption of innocence is regarded as so important. The defendant was charged with the murder of
his wife: his defence was that he had shot her accidentally, but as the law stood at the time he was guilty of murder unless he could convince the jury
that the death was indeed an accident. This he failed to do. The case went to the Court of Appeal, where Judge Swift, relying on the premises set out in
Fosters Crown Law and Rex v Greenacre, asserted that "the fact of killing being first proved, all the circumstances of accident, necessity or infirmity are to be satisfactorily proved by
the prisoner . . . the law presumeth the fact to have been founded in malice, unless the contrary appeareth" (Swift, 1935, cited 2003, BBC).
In other words, if it was established that the killing had in
fact been committed by the defendant, the burden of proof was on the defence to show that the act had not been one of murder ("founded in malice" - mens
rea) but one of self-defence, or accident. However, when the case went to the House of Lords, Lord Sankey overturned this legal principle by stating that the defendant was innocent
until proven guilty, and that the burden of proof was on the prosecution.
...