File Download
Supplementary

Article: Relevant Lies

TitleRelevant Lies
Authors
Issue Date2015
PublisherSweet & Maxwell. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.hku.hk/law/hklj/
Citation
Hong Kong Law Journal, 2015, v. 45 n. 1, p. 45-65 How to Cite?
AbstractThis article has three main objectives. The first is to promote an overt, objectively rigorous and principled approach to both the discipline and the potential of rational relevance as the cornerstone of admissibility, use and weight of evidence decisions in common law criminal trials. The second is to demonstrate the inadequacy in principle and practice of the traditional common law admissibility proxy for probative value of a division between relevance to issue and relevance to credit. Both objectives are approached through an in-depth examination of the irrational disparities in treatment of decisions to lie by prosecution/law enforcement personnel (officers), sexual offence complainants and defendants that adherence to the issue/ credit distinction has at least facilitated throughout the common law world. The third objective is to propose and illustrate the probable implications of an overt, objective and principled approach to relevance with the alternative starting point of a division between decisions to utter current offence lies and non-current offence lies.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/214198

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBrabyn, JM-
dc.date.accessioned2015-08-21T10:53:45Z-
dc.date.available2015-08-21T10:53:45Z-
dc.date.issued2015-
dc.identifier.citationHong Kong Law Journal, 2015, v. 45 n. 1, p. 45-65-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/214198-
dc.description.abstractThis article has three main objectives. The first is to promote an overt, objectively rigorous and principled approach to both the discipline and the potential of rational relevance as the cornerstone of admissibility, use and weight of evidence decisions in common law criminal trials. The second is to demonstrate the inadequacy in principle and practice of the traditional common law admissibility proxy for probative value of a division between relevance to issue and relevance to credit. Both objectives are approached through an in-depth examination of the irrational disparities in treatment of decisions to lie by prosecution/law enforcement personnel (officers), sexual offence complainants and defendants that adherence to the issue/ credit distinction has at least facilitated throughout the common law world. The third objective is to propose and illustrate the probable implications of an overt, objective and principled approach to relevance with the alternative starting point of a division between decisions to utter current offence lies and non-current offence lies.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherSweet & Maxwell. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.hku.hk/law/hklj/-
dc.relation.ispartofHong Kong Law Journal-
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License-
dc.titleRelevant Lies-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailBrabyn, JM: hrllbjm@hkucc.hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authorityBrabyn, JM=rp01238-
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.hkuros248509-
dc.identifier.hkuros248507-
dc.identifier.volume45-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spage45-
dc.identifier.epage65-
dc.publisher.placeHong Kong-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats