Excluding a confession obtained by an inducement: unreliability under PACE 1984 s.76(2)(b)
Liam O'Connor, aged 19, is interviewed at a police station in England on suspicion of burglary, having declined legal advice. During the interview the officer tells him: 'If you admit this now, you'll be home tonight and we'll forget about the other jobs.' Liam then confesses. At trial, the defence represents to the court that the confession was obtained in consequence of what the officer said. The prosecution replies that the confession is plainly true, as CCTV shows Liam near the property.
Which of the following best describes how the court must deal with the confession?
Choose one answer to see the reasoning.
Worked answer
Correct answer A: It must not admit the confession unless the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that it was not obtained in consequence of what was said, even if it may be true.
THE RULE TO REMEMBER
Once unreliability or oppression is raised, a confession is excluded unless the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt it was not so obtained, even if it may be true.
Excluding a confession obtained by an inducement: unreliability under PACE 1984 s.76(2)(b)
Section 76(2) of PACE 1984 applies where it is represented to the court that a confession was or may have been obtained by oppression or 'in consequence of anything said or done which was likely, in the circumstances existing at the time, to render unreliable any confession which might be made by him in consequence thereof'. Once that is raised, the court shall not allow the confession in evidence except so far as the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that the confession, notwithstanding that it may be true, was not so obtained. An offer of release that night and of dropping other matters, made to a young, unrepresented suspect, is a classic inducement likely to render a confession unreliable. Whether the confession is true is irrelevant to the test, and the court has no discretion: unless the prosecution discharges its burden, the confession is excluded.
Why B is wrong: Section 76(2) applies 'notwithstanding that it may be true', so corroboration of its truth does not make it admissible.
Why C is wrong: The burden is on the prosecution to the criminal standard, and the unreliability limb in s.76(2)(b) does not require oppression.
Why D is wrong: Section 76(2) is mandatory; s.78 is an additional discretion, not the only basis for exclusion.
Why E is wrong: Section 76(2)(b) looks at the likely effect of what was said or done, not whether the officer acted in bad faith.
A little more practice done.
Related questions
Discretion to exclude identification evidence obtained after a Code D breach (PACE 1984 s.78)
Which of the following best describes the court's power?
Extending detention without charge from 24 to 36 hours (PACE 1984 ss.41 and 42)
Which of the following best describes how Hannah's detention without charge may be extended?
Delaying access to legal advice at the police station (PACE s.58)
Which of the following best describes whether the delay is lawful?
A GOOD HABIT, DELIVERED
Tomorrow's question.
In your inbox.
One free question a day, with the answer and reasoning.
No course pitches. Just your daily practice.