Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

International Commentary on Evidence

Editor-in-Chief: Singh, Charanjit

1 Issue per year

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.105

See all formats and pricing
More options …

Comparative Observations on the Burden of Proof for Criminal Defences

Hock Lai Ho
Published Online: 2012-01-10 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2202/1554-4567.1119

This essay analyses the decisions of the United States Supreme Court on the allocation of the burden of proof in relation to criminal defences. The Court seems generally comfortable about letting the accused carry the persuasive burden of proving excuses and justifications. It is seemingly different in those other common law countries where the so-called ‘golden thread’ proclaimed by the House of Lords in Woolmington v DPP holds sway, and where it is accepted as a general rule that the prosecution must disprove beyond reasonable doubt any defence that has been put in issue. This essay explores and tries to explain this difference. The divergence is explicable as a matter of legal history, but at the bottom of it are arguably a conceptual dispute on the offence-defence distinction and competing visions of politics that bear on the theory of the criminal trial.

Keywords: law; evidence; burden; proof; affirmative defenses; criminal trial

About the article

Published Online: 2012-01-10

Citation Information: International Commentary on Evidence, ISSN (Online) 1554-4567, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2202/1554-4567.1119.

Export Citation

©2012 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston. Copyright Clearance Center

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in