Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act

Official Summary

To make provision about anti-social behaviour, crime and disorder, including provision about recovery of possession of dwelling houses; to make provision amending the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, Schedules 7 and 8 to the Terrorism Act 2000 and the Extradition Act 2003; to make provision about firearms and about forced marriage; to make provision about the police, the Independent Police Complaints Commission and the Serious Fraud Office; to make provision about criminal justice and court fees; and for connected purposes.

Summary powered by AnyModel

Overview

This bill, an amendment to the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill, focuses on clarifying the standard of proof required for a defendant to demonstrate that evidence against them has been so significantly undermined that a conviction is impossible. The amendment changes the wording used to describe this situation, replacing the phrase "was innocent of" with "did not commit".

Description

Original Clause 151

Clause 151, as originally proposed, aimed to set a high threshold for a defendant to challenge the admissibility of evidence against them on the grounds that it was so unreliable as to prevent any conviction. The original wording was open to interpretation.

Lords Amendment 112

The House of Lords proposed an amendment to clarify this standard, suggesting a conviction should only be prevented if the evidence is conclusively shown to be so undermined that no conviction could possibly be based upon it.

Commons Amendment 112A

The House of Commons disagreed with the Lords' amendment and proposed a different amendment. This replaced the phrase "was innocent of" with the phrase "did not commit" in the relevant section of the legislation. This change aims for a more precise and unambiguous legal standard for challenging evidence.

Government Spending

This amendment is not expected to have a significant direct impact on government spending. The cost will primarily relate to the administrative processes of implementing the change in legal wording and any potential legal challenges that may arise.

Groups Affected

The amendment primarily impacts:

Defendants: The amendment may influence the success of challenges to evidence used in their prosecution. The amended wording might make it slightly more difficult to successfully challenge evidence.
Prosecutors: The amendment affects the burden of proof, potentially impacting the admissibility of evidence presented in court.
Judges and Juries: This amendment requires judges and juries to apply the revised wording when considering the admissibility of evidence and its impact on a possible conviction.
Legal professionals: Solicitors and barristers will need to adjust their legal arguments and strategies in line with the amendment's revised wording.

Full Text

DISCLAIMER: AI technology is not 100% accurate and summaries may contain errors, use at your own risk. Munro Research holds the copyright for all summaries found this website. Reproduction for non-commercial purposes is permitted but must be displayed alongside a link to this website. Contact info@munro-research to license commercially.