The case for principled and practical propensity evidence reform
Access status:
Open Access
Type
ArticleAuthor/s
Hamer, DavidAbstract
In September 2017 the Royal Commission into Child Sexual Abuse identified the exclusion of propensity evidence as "one of the most significant [criminal justice] issues". To gain admission propensity evidence must satisfy certain potentially stringent requirements. The Royal ...
See moreIn September 2017 the Royal Commission into Child Sexual Abuse identified the exclusion of propensity evidence as "one of the most significant [criminal justice] issues". To gain admission propensity evidence must satisfy certain potentially stringent requirements. The Royal Commission, drawing on case studies, submissions and commissioned research, concluded that propensity evidence is more probative and less prejudicial than traditionally appreciated. It recommended that the admissibility requirements be relaxed. A working group of the Council of Attorneys General (CAG) developed a set of model provisions to implement the Royal Commission’s recommendations. Late last November the CAG announced that UEL jurisdictions would implement them. On 25 February 2020, the NSW Attorney-General was the first jurisdiction to introduce a Bill to implement the reforms. Unfortunately, the Bill raises real concern. It is appropriate for the propensity evidence to be admitted more readily. But the way the Bill goes about this increases the complexity and inefficiency of the law and unnecessarily increases the risk of prejudice.
See less
See moreIn September 2017 the Royal Commission into Child Sexual Abuse identified the exclusion of propensity evidence as "one of the most significant [criminal justice] issues". To gain admission propensity evidence must satisfy certain potentially stringent requirements. The Royal Commission, drawing on case studies, submissions and commissioned research, concluded that propensity evidence is more probative and less prejudicial than traditionally appreciated. It recommended that the admissibility requirements be relaxed. A working group of the Council of Attorneys General (CAG) developed a set of model provisions to implement the Royal Commission’s recommendations. Late last November the CAG announced that UEL jurisdictions would implement them. On 25 February 2020, the NSW Attorney-General was the first jurisdiction to introduce a Bill to implement the reforms. Unfortunately, the Bill raises real concern. It is appropriate for the propensity evidence to be admitted more readily. But the way the Bill goes about this increases the complexity and inefficiency of the law and unnecessarily increases the risk of prejudice.
See less
Date
2020Source title
Australian Law JournalVolume
94Issue
4Publisher
Thomson ReutersLicence
Copyright All Rights ReservedRights statement
This article was published by Thomson Reuters in the Australian Law Journal and should be cited as Hamer, D. (2020). The case for principled and practical propensity evidence reform. Australian Law Journal, 94(4), 239–246. For all subscription inquiries please phone, from Australia: 1300 304 195, from Overseas: +61 2 8587 7980 or online at legal.thomsonreuters.com.au/search. The official PDF version of this article can also be purchased separately from Thomson Reuters at http://sites.thomsonreuters.com.au/journals/subscribe-or-purchase. This publication is copyright. Other than for the purposes of and subject to the conditions prescribed under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth), no part of it may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, microcopying, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted without prior written permission. Enquiries should be addressed to Thomson Reuters (Professional) Australia Limited. PO Box 3502, Rozelle NSW 2039. legal.thomsonreuters.com.auFaculty/School
The University of Sydney Law SchoolShare