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

Question Regarding the Law

posted 10 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 10 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 8 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 8 years ago

OK thank you.

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