R v Dunbar
1958 · 1 QB 1
Posted By lanbuk.com
- Facts
- Dunbar was charged with murder and raised diminished responsibility under section 2 of the Homicide Act 1957. Section 2(2) says the accused shall prove that he is suffering from the abnormality the section describes. The direction put that burden on him at the criminal standard.
- Issue
- When statute says the accused shall prove diminished responsibility, what standard does he have to meet?
- Held
- The Court of Criminal Appeal held that the burden is on the accused, and that the standard is the , not proof .
- Principle
- An express statutory reverse burden is a . Carr-Briant fixes the standard at the balance of probabilities.
- Why it matters
- It is the worked example of section 2(2). The prosecution must still prove the killing itself beyond reasonable doubt.
Words and Latin in this note
- Balance of probabilities
- The standard of proof in civil cases, and the standard when an accused bears a legal burden: the court asks whether something is more likely than not to have happened. Open the note.
- Beyond reasonable doubt
- The high standard of proof in criminal cases: the prosecution must prove guilt so that the tribunal is sure. It is short of certainty, and it is not a mere shadow of a doubt. Open the note.
- Legal burden
- The obligation to prove a fact to the required standard, or lose on that issue. In crime it is on the prosecution, beyond reasonable doubt, except for insanity and a statutory exception, which the accused proves on the balance of probabilities. Open the note.
For study only. By lanbuk.com. Always check current sources and consult a qualified professional.