Woolmington v DPP
1935 · AC 462
Posted By lanbuk.com
- Facts
- Reginald Woolmington, aged 21, shot his wife Violet at her mother's house. They had separated. He said he had taken a sawn-off shotgun to frighten her into coming back, and that it went off by accident when he threatened to shoot himself. Swift J directed the jury that once the prosecution proved the death by his act, he had to satisfy them it was an accident or manslaughter. The Court of Criminal Appeal upheld the .
- Issue
- Does an accused who raises accident have to prove it?
- Held
- No. The House of Lords allowed the appeal. Viscount Sankey LC said the prosecution must prove the prisoner's guilt, subject to the defence of insanity and to any statutory exception. If at the end of the case there is a reasonable doubt, the prisoner is entitled to be .
- Principle
- The golden thread is that the prosecution bears the throughout a criminal trial. The burden does not move to the accused because he raises accident.
- Why it matters
- It is the starting point. Kargbo, Kargbo and Kamara v Reginam is the Sierra Leone case that applies the same rule.
Words and Latin in this note
- Burden of proof
- The duty on one side of a case to prove the facts it relies on. If that side fails, it loses on that point. In a criminal trial it stays with the prosecution, except for insanity and a statutory exception. Open the note.
For study only. By lanbuk.com. Always check current sources and consult a qualified professional.