Leggate v HMA, 1988 JC 127
Citation: Leggate v HMA, 1988 JC 127
Rule of thumb: When are past convictions & past character failures relevant? They are relevant where they are similar to what is being accused. If they are not the same but similar it is a matter for the Judge to determine. Where a person has a past history of crimes it affects their credibility in the eyes of the law.
Judgment:
The Court held that there are largely 3 circumstances where an accused can be questioned on past offences, 1) where there is a long history of similar behaviour and it is needed for the defence of the public, 2) where the accused has made reference to good character, and 3) where the accused has given evidence about the character of other people accused – although this does not apply when the accused is simply saying that the witness is lying in this particular case. The Court held that it should not be used where the prosecution are simply looking to discredit the person accused. The Court held that the Judge in the case has a wide discretion in weighing these matters up, ‘In cases where cross-examination of an accused person on his previous convictions or other character is permitted the reason is that these may have a bearing on his credibility. Such evidence is not, however, relevant to his guilt of the offence charged on the indictment ... admissibility ... matter of discretion and fairness’
Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.