According to R v Hanson (2005) what three requirements did the court set out when the Crown is seeking to adduce evidence to establish their propensity to commit similar crimes to which they have alreayd committed? 1) Did the history of his convictions establish a propensity to commit offences of the kind charged? 2) Did that propensity make it more likely that the defendant had committed the offence charged? 3) Was it unjust to
Correct Answer:
Answered by Quizplus AI
View Answer
Unlock this answer now
Get Access to more Verified Answers free of charge
Q6: Who does S101 (g) apply to ?
Q7: When will evidence be admissible under S101
Q8: In which of the situations is the
Q9: The definition of bad character can now
Q10: Unproven behaviour may be held to be
Q11: A defendant can he argue he did
Q12: The similar fact rule was upheld by
Q13: S101 (1) (a) is the simplest way
Q14: The court has a discretion to exclude
Q15: Evidence of a defedants bad character is
Unlock this Answer For Free Now!
View this answer and more for free by performing one of the following actions
Scan the QR code to install the App and get 2 free unlocks
Unlock quizzes for free by uploading documents