The paper is a submission of Australian criminal procedure and evidence academics opposing the NSW Government's proposed changes to the right to silence. These changes (later implemented) allow an adverse inference to be drawn from a suspect's failure to provide information during police interview. The submission opposes the changes on the grounds that it has not been shown that they are required, and also that they are exceedingly complex and are likely to create practical problems both in the police station and in the courts. The submission notes how similar changes in England are generally viewed as creating more problems than they have solved.
Keywords: right to silence, criminal procedure, police interview, evidence, proof, law and order
Hamer, David A. and Anthony, Thalia and Anthony, Thalia and Biber, Katherine and Crofts, Penny and Dennis, Ian and Douglas, Heather and Eburn, Michael and Edmond, Gary and Farrar, Salim and Hopkins, Anthony and Kumar, Miiko A. and Ligertwood, Andrew and Loughnan, Arlie and Mitchell, Tanya and Palmer, Andrew and San Roque, Mehera and Townsley, Lesley, Submission on Exposure Draft: Evidence Amendment (Evidence of Silence) Bill 2012 (February 25, 2014). Sydney Law School Research Paper No. 14/20, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2401445
International, Transnational & Comparative Criminal Law eJournal
Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic
FOLLOWERS
404
PAPERS
8,033
This Journal is curated by:
Diane Marie Amann at University of Georgia School of Law
Feedback
Feedback to SSRN
If you need immediate assistance, call 877-SSRNHelp (877 777 6435) in the United States, or +1 212 448 2500 outside of the United States, 8:30AM to 6:00PM U.S. Eastern, Monday - Friday.