MovieChat Forums > 10 Rillington Place (1971) Discussion > Question Regarding the Law

Question Regarding the Law

posted 9 years ago by highpriestess32
3 replies | jump to latest

I think I might have to rewind and concentrate because I think Christie is actually a witness in this scene. I fell asleep last night before the end so am trying to re-cap (only just got the DVD a few days ago).

I'll ask anyway even if I risk looking foolish because it's bugging me. Are prosecution teams still allowed to bring up past cases to undermine a witness regardless of whether or not he is the one on trial? The Prosecution are reading out a list of four previous convictions.

I hope you get where I am coming from. Sorry to be so dense but I'm totally exhausted today and not on the top of my game. Thanks for any pointers if you can elaborate 

"Has anyone seen my wife?" - Columbo

[–] angelfox 9 years ago

The prosecution brought up Christies previous convictions as Evans had implicated him in his statement.it did no good as Christie won the sympathy of both judge and jury.

[–] Arseweb 7 years ago

It's not always allowed, but generally it is when they are "convictions or cautions for offences involving dishonesty, fraud/forgery, perjury, perverting the course of justice, or a like offence", because it informs about the credibility of the witness. Note that the barrister in the film stresses that the 4 cases involved dishonesty.

That quote comes from the Crown Prosecution Service website http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/disclosure_of_previous_convictions_of_prosecution_witnesses/

I don't know if the rules have changed since the time of the Evans trial but I would imagine that if anything they were less strict back then.

[–] highpriestess32 7 years ago

OK thank you.

"These days you have to boil someone before you can sleep with them"