File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
  • Find via Find It@HKUL
Supplementary

Article: The Persistent Problem of the Prosecutor's Prima Facie Burden

TitleThe Persistent Problem of the Prosecutor's Prima Facie Burden
Authors
KeywordsCriminal procedure
burden of proof at the end of the prosecution's case
Singapore
Issue Date1997
PublisherSingapore Academy of Law. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.sal.org.sg/SALPublications-Journal.htm
Citation
Singapore Academy of Law Journal, 1997, v. 9, p. 388-406 How to Cite?
Abstract[A]t the end of the prosecution's case, the accused is entitled to an acquittal unless the case against him, at this intermediate stage, 'has been made out which if unrebutted would warrant his conviction'. While the principle of proof beyond reasonable doubt at the end of the trial is reasonably clear, the question of the precise burden of proof on the prosecution at the end of its case (the prima facie burden) has been embroiled in controversy for the last sixteen years. The choice which emerges from this debate is between proof beyond a reasonable doubt, unless the accused successfully rebuts the case against him ('maximum evaluation'), and the existence of some evidence, which, if believed, would found a conviction ('minimum evaluation'). . . . The existence of respectable, even eminent, legal opinion on both sides of the dispute alerts us at once to the suspicion that the choice between the two alternative interpretations cannot be easily made.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/198522
ISSN
SSRN

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHor, MYMen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-07-07T07:14:15Z-
dc.date.available2014-07-07T07:14:15Z-
dc.date.issued1997en_US
dc.identifier.citationSingapore Academy of Law Journal, 1997, v. 9, p. 388-406en_US
dc.identifier.issn0218-2009en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/198522-
dc.description.abstract[A]t the end of the prosecution's case, the accused is entitled to an acquittal unless the case against him, at this intermediate stage, 'has been made out which if unrebutted would warrant his conviction'. While the principle of proof beyond reasonable doubt at the end of the trial is reasonably clear, the question of the precise burden of proof on the prosecution at the end of its case (the prima facie burden) has been embroiled in controversy for the last sixteen years. The choice which emerges from this debate is between proof beyond a reasonable doubt, unless the accused successfully rebuts the case against him ('maximum evaluation'), and the existence of some evidence, which, if believed, would found a conviction ('minimum evaluation'). . . . The existence of respectable, even eminent, legal opinion on both sides of the dispute alerts us at once to the suspicion that the choice between the two alternative interpretations cannot be easily made.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherSingapore Academy of Law. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.sal.org.sg/SALPublications-Journal.htmen_US
dc.relation.ispartofSingapore Academy of Law Journalen_US
dc.subjectCriminal procedureen_US
dc.subjectburden of proof at the end of the prosecution's caseen_US
dc.subjectSingaporeen_US
dc.titleThe Persistent Problem of the Prosecutor's Prima Facie Burdenen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailHor, MYM: mhor@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.volume9en_US
dc.identifier.spage388en_US
dc.identifier.epage406en_US
dc.publisher.placeSingaporeen_US
dc.identifier.ssrn698683-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats