Could the conviction be quashed on the grounds that the judge said it was for the jury to decide whether woolmington had proved that the evidence was in his favour. Woolmington v dpp 1935 ukhl 1 legal helpdesk lawyers. On this day in 1935, the united kingdom house of lords delivered woolmington v dpp 1935 ukhl 1 23 may 1935. Woolmington v dpp 1935 ukhl 1 is a famous house of lords case in english law, where the presumption of innocence was first articulated in the commonwealth history. Woolmington v director of public prosecutions case brief. On december 10 woolmington stole a doublebarrelled shotgun and cartridges from his employer, rode a bicycle to his motherinlaws house where he shot and killed. Unravelling the golden thread woolmington in the high. The judgment is available online through bailii the british and irish legal information in the case of woolmington v dpp 1935 institute. There is no reason to repeat to the jury the warning as to reasonable doubt again and again, provided that the direction.
Thus in mancini v director of public prosecutions 1942 ac 1, 11, viscount simon lc referred, as an exception to the rule in woolmingtons case, to offences where onus of proof is specially dealt with by statute. Pdf the presumption of innocence and reverse burdens. After the street offenses act passed in 1959, it made it difficult for prostitutes to solicit custo. Unravelling the golden thread woolmington in the high court of australia abstract the principle that the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt is basic to the administration of criminal justice woolmington v the queen. An accused cannot commit a conspiracy unless the venture he conspired to undertake is criminal and codified as such. Cited mancini v director of public prosecutions hl 1942 ac 1, 1941 3 all er 272 there are exceptional cases to the rule in woolmington for.
The paper also takes a look into the concept of reasonable doubt, what it constitutes, its lack of a definite. Woolmington v dpp united kingdom house of lords 23 may, 1935 1935 ukhl 1 1935 ac 462 1935 1 ac 462 1936 25 cr app r 72. Criminal law notes criminal law cases webstroke law. Violet woolmington was married to reginald woolmington. Case notes australasian legal information institute. Shaw v dpp 1962 ac 220 united kingdom house of lords. Woolmington v director of public prosecutions case brief wiki. Prior to that case, the burden of proof had been on the accused. Three months after his marriage, his wife left him to live her mother. Criminal law involves actions penalised and enforced by the state. This work is intended for educational use only, it does not constitute legal advice and. Throughout the web of the english criminal law one golden thread is always to be seen, that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove the prisoners guilt subject to what i have already said as to the defence of insanity and subject also to any statutory exception. Reginald woolmington, a farm labourer, from castleton near sherbourne, had been convicted at bristol assizes of killing his wife, violet, by shooting her through the heart.
On november 22, 1934, three months after his marriage to 17yearold violet kathleen woolmington, his wife left him and went to live with her mother. Justifications for the woolmington principle law general essay. The woolmington principle primarily asserts that in criminal cases the burden of proof shall lie with the prosecution. It has been championed in and by courts as the golden thread of the english legal system, receiving classic formulation in the case of woolmington v dpp. Page numbers refer to the report available on bailii. A decision of the house of lords, woolmington v dpp 1935 represents the first clear statement in english. Viscount sankey said, throughout the web of the english criminal law one golden thread is always.
A major strand of the ensuing debate has focused on the scope. Very few of the thousands of criminal offences will be explored on this website, but the concepts. Dpp 1935 the accused admitted killing his wife but claimed that the gun had gone off accidentally. The presumption of innocence is like a golden thread in. Please sign in for more information about this case, including. Long before the passage of the human rights act, viscount sankey lc in woolmington v dpp 1935 ac 462 referred to the presumption of innocence as the one golden thread which runs through the web of english criminal law. Diploma in legal studies criminal law fundamental principles and concepts of criminal law.
Woolmington showed his wife a gun and said he would commit suicide if she left him to live elsewhere. If, at the end of and on the whole of the case, there is a reasonable doubt, created by the evidence given by. Scribd is the worlds largest social reading and publishing site. My lords, the appellant, reginald woolmington, after a trial at the somerset assizes at. Reginald went to visit her in order to persuade her to come back to him. This paper considers the standard of proof in criminal cases and how the evidential burden shifts as situation demands. A decision of the house of lords, woolmington v dpp 1935 represents the first clear statement in english law that a person accused of a criminal offence is entitled to.
Woolmington v dpp 1935 ac 462 university of waikato. Woolmington v dpp 1935 beyond a reasonable doubt this case set the law on how far the prosecution must prove its case to get a conviction. Get free access to the complete judgment in woolmington v dpp on casemine. What is the significance of the case woolmington v dpp. Its a british law case that established precedent as far as proving a case beyond reasonable doubt. Viscount simondslord reidlord tuckerlord morris of borthygestlord hodson. On the 22nd of november 1934, 3 months into marriage to kathleen woolmingtion, she left. Woolmington was a 21yearold farmer from castleton, dorset. In woolmington v dpp, the defendant, reginald woolmington, had separated from his wife, violet woolmington. Reginald woolmington was a 21yearold farm labourer from castleton, dorset. Choose printable pdf version to get the page numbers. Criminal law is made up of thousands of different offences, ranging from serious offences such as rape and murder, to regulatory offences such as using a mobile phone while driving. Woolmington v dpp 1935 beyond a reasonable doubt page. Assignment question on the concept of presumption of innocence for evidence law.
After hearing counsel as well yesterday as this day, upon the petition and appeal of reginald woolmington, praying, that the matter of the order set forth in the first schedule thereto, namely, an order of his majestys court of criminal appeal, of the 18th of march 1935, might. Woolmington v dpp 1935 ukhl 1 is a landmark house of lords case, where the presumption. Viscount sankey lc, lord hewart lc, lord atkin, lord tomlin, and lord wright. A read is counted each time someone views a publication summary such as the title, abstract, and list of authors, clicks on a figure, or views or downloads the fulltext.
Woolmington v dpp reasonable doubt burden of proof law. The case reached the house of lords now the supreme court. R 123 1946, including the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, key terms, and concurrences and dissents. Woolmington v dpp 1935 ukhl 1 united kingdom house of. In 1934, three months after his marriage to 17year old violet kathleen woolmington she left him and went to live with her mother. Director of public prosecutions case brief rule of law. On the 22nd of november 1934, 3 months into marriage to kathleen woolmingtion, she left him and went to live with her mother.
Throughout the web of english law one golden thread is always to be seen, that it. Read a case report of the full house of lords judgment ukhl 1. Federico picinali innocence and burdens of proof in. Woolmington v dpp burden of proof criminal law uwe.
Viscount sankey put it in the following words that surface time and. Woolmington v director of public prosecution appeal allowed plea of not guilty no new trial. The trial judge directed the jury that once the prosecution had shown. Woolmington 1935 ac 462 this case considered the issue of the standard of proof required in a criminal trial and whether or not a judge failed to properly direct a jury on the required onus of proof. Crime and sentencing offences against the person murder.
864 596 941 1397 957 1335 611 331 1616 1023 1556 13 5 1512 781 821 908 570 960 88 1664 1519 961 228 13 611 1396 1327 505 978 913 541 182 330 8 522