Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

I understand the rule about not being able to force an accused to testify in his/her own trial, but that dates from when testimony was an oral process and (the threat of)torture or other duress could be used to elicit it. I cannot think why the kind of undisclosed evidence discussed here, in favour of the accused, should not be used as evidence against the accused, whether it's found on, eg, a phone belonging to him/her or someone else.
If the accused makes some statement that unquestionably betrays guilt, the solicitor, I understand, cannot present a plea of 'Not guilty', but can tell the accused that it means he must withdraw, leaving the substitute free to do so. There is a certain dishonesty in that, which may be necessary, but I can see no reason of 'Justice', 'fair trial' why, if the solicitor also finds, on a device which the accused has presented in his defence, clear evidence of guilt (eg, speaking to an accomplice or a 'mate') that fact should not also be compulsorily disclosable. I assume it is not.

Your details

Cancel