Quote:
Originally Posted by joeysteele
This has been a contentious issue for a good while and in some trials this can happen.
I can take on board much of what you say above in your post.
However, there are 2 ways to look at it.
Once you reveal previous convictions,even possibly a lot smaller than the current crime being tried in court.
The chance of a fair trial is then greatly diminished and the revealing of previous convictions clouds the whole trial.
That could mean someone who had done a lot wrong in the past, then turned their life around but then perhaps were in the wrong place at the wrong time, could be discounted as being able to tell the truth and leave his/her trial a forgone conclusion against them because of previous crimes.
A trial should be about the issue in hand at the time,with enough evidence to win conviction on that alone,otherwise in all truth, fair trials could be near impossible to conduct.
|
I agree previous convictions should not have a bearing on a current trial but I think when the previous conviction is for the same offence then I think it does have a bearing . Say this person has a history of burglary and they are charged with another burglary then I think their previous form for this offence is a factor however small and this fact should be disclosed to the jury especially if it comes down to a balance of probabilities in trying to decide guilt.
Knowing this person is capable of burglary and has committed this offence on many occasions may help the jury in deciding the current case.
I think disclosure should only be made however when the person has a string of convictions for the same offence they are currently charged with.