Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Right to silence
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=====History===== Warnings regarding the right against self-incrimination may have originated in [[England and Wales]]. In 1912, the judges of the [[King's Bench Division|King's Bench]] issued the [[Judges' Rules]]. These provided that, when a police member had admissible evidence to suspect a person of an offence and wished to question that suspect about an offence, the officer should first caution the person that he was entitled to remain silent. However, the warning about the possibility of anything the male suspect said being potentially used against him predates even that. The pre-trial operation of the privilege against self-incrimination was further buttressed by the decision in ''Ibrahim v R'' [1914] AC 599 that an admission or confession made by the accused to the police would only be admissible in evidence if the prosecution could establish that it had been voluntary. An admission or confession is only voluntary if made in the exercise of a free choice about whether to speak or remain silent: In ''R v Leckey'' (1943) CAR 128 the Court of Criminal Appeal said: {{Blockquote|... an innocent person might well, either from excessive caution or for some other reason, decline to say anything when charged and cautioned, and if it were possible to hold that out to a jury as a ground on which they might find a man guilty, it is obvious that innocent persons might be in great peril.}} Therefore, a caution of the form of: {{Blockquote|You have the right to remain silent, but anything you do say will be taken down and may be used in evidence.}} was used. Major reform to the questioning and treatment of suspected offenders occurred in 1984 when the [[Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984|Police and Criminal Evidence Act]] came into force. Under Code C the right to silence was amended by allowing adverse inferences to be drawn at a court hearing in cases where a suspect refuses to explain something, and then later produces an explanation (see [[right to silence in England and Wales]]).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/police/operational-policing/pace-codes/pace-code-c |title=PACE Code C 2008 |publisher=Homeoffice.gov.uk |date=17 May 2010 |access-date=2014-07-09}}</ref> In other words, the jury is entitled to infer that the accused fabricated the explanation at a later date, as he refused to provide the explanation during police questioning. The jury is also free to make no such inference. The new caution is: <blockquote>You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention, when questioned, something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.</blockquote> If questioning is forthcoming, "when questioned" may be replaced with "now". In cases in which the suspect has clearly nothing to gain by failing to remain silent: <blockquote>Anything you do say may, and will, be given in evidence.</blockquote> or: <blockquote>You do not have to say anything unless you wish to do so, but I must warn you that if you fail to mention any fact which you rely on in your defence in court, your failure to take this opportunity to mention it may be treated in court as supporting any relevant evidence against you. If you do wish to say anything, what you say may be given in evidence.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Oshitokunbo|first=Oshisanya, 'lai|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xMvOBAAAQBAJ&q=You+do+not+have+to+say+anything+unless+you+wish+to+do+so,+but+I+must+warn+you+that+if+you+fail+to+mention+any+fact+which+you+rely+on+in+your+defence+in+court,+your+failure+to+take+this+opportunity+to+mention+it+may+be+treated+in+court+as+supporting+any+relevant+evidence+against+you.+If+you+do+wish+to+say+anything,+what+you+say+may+be+given+in+evidence&pg=PA269|title=An Almanac of Contemporary and Comparative Judicial Restatements (ACCJR Supp. ii Public Law): ACCJR Supplement ii|date=2020-01-02|publisher=Almanac Foundation|isbn=978-978-51200-5-9|language=en}}</ref>{{Citation needed|date=November 2010}}</blockquote> or even (in circumstances where no adverse inference can be drawn from silence): <blockquote>You do not have to say anything, but anything you do say may be given in evidence.</blockquote>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)