Woolmington v Director of Public Prosecutions
1935 · [1935] AC 462
Posted By lanbuk.com
- Facts
- Woolmington was of the murder of his wife. The trial judge had told the jury that once the prosecution proved that he had killed her, he had to satisfy the jury that the killing was an accident.
- Issue
- Who bears the burden of proving guilt, and did the direction reverse it?
- Held
- The House of Lords quashed the conviction. Viscount Sankey LC stated that it is always the duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoner's guilt, subject to the defence of insanity and to any statutory exception.
- Principle
- The golden thread: if, on the whole of the case, there is a reasonable doubt, the prosecution has not made out the case and the accused is entitled to an .
- Why it matters
- It is the starting authority on the in a criminal trial in a common-law system, and it matches the in section 23(4) of the 1991 Constitution.
Words and Latin in this note
- Presumption of innocence
- The rule that a person charged with an offence is innocent until the prosecution proves guilt. Section 23(4) of the Constitution of Sierra Leone 1991 states it. Open the 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.