Module: Criminal Law and the Law of Criminal Evidence
Module Code: LAW-5-CL2
Credit Value LLB 20 CAT’s
Assessment Trial Observation
Date for Submission: Friday 30 April 2021 via online submission on Moodle.
COURSEWORK FORM FOR SUBMISSION
STUDENT CANDIDATE NUMBER……………………………………………….
ONLINE TRIAL NAME……………………………………………………………………….
DATE OF VISIT………………………………………………………………………
DURATION OF TRIAL (HOURS)………………………………………………….
NUMBER OF DEFENDANTS……………………………………………………….
OFFENCE CHARGED……………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………….
BRIEFLY STATE THE PROSECUTION CASE
The case was between Mr. Kenneth Eden and Barbara Mary Brown, a Broom Lodge community home student. Kenneth Brown was accused of two charges, theft charges according to the Theft Act of 1978 after stealing a silver neck and a valuable pendant, on twenty-five June in full Chester worth of seven ponds . The accused denied the charges and pleaded not guilty. Kenneth Eden was also accused of another offense of assaulting Barbara, a minor and an unofficial daughter since Mrs. and Mrs. Eden acted as the unofficial aunt and uncle for years. Attorneys representing both sides questioned the witnesses on various allegations to determine whether Mr. Eden was guilty of the accusations. . Kenneth was accused of having committed both offenses on Saturday afternoon, 25 June, after inviting Barbara into his house for some tea with his wife, Mrs. Eden, also known as Margaret. According to Barbara, Mr. Eden called the school, where she picked and received the invitation in the afternoon. Having not told anyone about the invite, Barbara went to Mr. Eden’s home in acre high, where he made sexual advances. According to Barbara, Mrs. Margaret was not around, as stated earlier by Mr. Eden. Hence. They were all alone at home chatting, sun busking, and listening to crickets on a sun lounger. During this time that Mr. Eden took off her necklace, fastened it on his neck, and later put his hands in her bra, trying to reach to the bra handler .
Mr. Eden’s sexual gestures were threatening to Barbara. She jumped up in shock. As a result, her blouse and bra strap was torn by Mr. Eden’s hands that were caught in the blouse. Barbara threatened to tell his wife immediately, which made him panic, start crying and asked her not to tell anyone. Mr. Eden, however, denied all the allegations, such as calling the school, inviting Barbara, putting his hand in Barbara’s blouse, tearing her blouse, and stealing the necklace, which was in his neck when the police arrived on the scene. According to the hearings, Barbara’s mother noticed that her daughters’ blouse was torn on the shoulders after she went home crying straight to the bedroom. The mother, however, was concerned and decided to call the police, using a statement that “how long will it take for you to do something”. The court process involved testimonies from witnesses’ interviews of the defendant and the victim and pieces of evidence presented by the attorneys. Some of the witnesses included Barbara, Miss Linnet Mason, Margaret’s wife to Mr. Eden, and Miss Lawton, a social worker in a social service department in charge of children’s community homes at Broom Lodge school .
Apart from Mrs. Eden, the witnesses supporting the allegations and confirming that Mr. Eden had weird behaviors of not keeping “his hands to himself”, Miss Lawton stated that Mr. Eden had sacked Aisha before the court and pinched her behind. Also, Eden had written to the department concerning Lawton’s being unfit to work in the department, which was based on his emotional pressure after the social worker had a close relationship with Miranda. Mr. Eden, however, did not like Miss Lawton due to her strong political beliefs and support for the vulnerable, such as women and less privileged in the community. Furthermore, Miss Linnet Mason, a former member of the Broom Large community, testified of Mr. Eden’s sexual interests and after visiting her home six months before the accusations. According to Miss Mason, Mr. Eden had could pull the student into a corner. The case was supported by evidence showing the clothes worn by Barbara on that day, including a blue skirt, brown pants, a necklace given by her mother on her birthday, and some sandals.
1. STATE ALL THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED BY THE PROSECUTION AND THE FACTS IN THE PROSECUTION CASE THAT ARE PROVEN BY THE EVIDENCE.
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE FACTS IN ISSUE PROVED
A
PROSECUTION EVIDENCE FACTS IN ISSUE PROVED
2. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE SUBSTANCE OF THE DEFENCE CASE.
Mr. Eden denied the allegations from Barbara and the witnesses who have similar accusations of assault in support of the defense attorney. However, the defense counsel stated several defenses to the accusations, both for the assault and stealing the silver necklace and the pendant worth seven pounds. The defense included Mr. Eden having been intoxicated that afternoon; hence he did not know what he was doing. There was a slight physical; contact that took place, but Barbara misinterpreted it and exaggerated the touch into an assault to be out of proportion.
• Barbara did not tell anyone concerning the call, and the visit to Mr. Eden was suspicious enough to conclude that Barbara knew precisely what she was going to do in the house.
• Barbara misinterpreted the touch, which was innocently made, and made a fuss out of it.
• It was a suspicious co-incidental how Barbara was passing when Mr. Eden made the call.
• Due to Barbara’s remark concerning her mother’s hate towards Mr. Eden, it could have been that everything was not true and that the family exaggerated the case, which was based on emotions.
• Barbara had a crush on Mr. Eden, hence had a fantasy while sleeping about him touching her. Sexual imaginations drove this.
• Barbara sent a valentine card in a box to Mr. Aiden, a written guess from whom Barbara agreed to, stating it was all a joke.
• The defense counsel made several observations from Barbara and the house mother that were suspicious concerning the accusations, especially concerning Barbara’s interview, which was full of uncertainties concerning Mr. Eden’s actions and words.
3. DESCRIBE THE EVIDENCE – IF ANY – PRESENTED BY THE DEFENCE. THIS SHOULD INCLUDE THE DEFENDANT’S TESTIMONY, AND ANY EVIDENCE THAT THE DEFENCE OBTAINED THROUGH THE CROSS-EXAMINATION OF PROSECUTION WITNESSES.
DEFENCE EVIDENCE FACTS IN ISSUE PROVEN
DEFENCE EVIDENCE FACTS IN ISSUE PROV
4. WHAT WERE THE FACTS IN ISSUE BETWEEN THE PROSECUTION AND THE DEFENCE?
The facts in both prosecutions, and the defense, was that Mr. Eden couldn’t keep his hands off women, and his weakness is young girls. Also, Mr. Eden was a manipulator who believed he was doing right and used his power to assault women, including her wife, bribed to come back home on Sunday. Also, Mr. Eden was guilty because he answered questions in court angrily and defensively, thus creating many suspicions. Barbara was a minor, while Eden a mentor and an older person. Yet, he had the mind and resources to manipulate the young girl and others according to Miss Lawton’s words.
Furthermore, it was not the first time Eden was trying to have an affair with Barbara. Earlier on, Barbara had sent Mr. Eden’s valentine gift. Mr. Lawton was a cheater and never reported to his wife, which made him more suspicious of assaulting Barbara and other ladies that testified in court. Mr. Eden was trying to be defensive in court and never spoke the truth, which made him deny all allegations from Barbara and other victims.
5. IDENTIFY THE TYPES OF EVIDENCE PRESENTED DURING THE TRIAL YOU OBSERVED. (FOR EXAMPLE EXPERT EVIDENCE, REAL EVIDENCE, AND DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE ETC.)
Miss Lawton’s evidence concerning Mr. Eden’s behavior towards another female and his writing about her job for standing up for herself showed that he never respected women and felt intimated by those he couldn’t manipulate. Also, Eden’s reaction in court was indisputable evidence that he was lying, which made him bitter, and defensive about every question asked. His looks and how he looked at Barbara and other witnesses were clear; he intended to stop them from telling the truth because he cared much about his reputation instead of morality. Another evidence is a statement in which Mr. Eden admitted to having said to inspector Charlie that “if it ever happened to be brought up in court, that’s one thing I can imagine myself being charged with since little girls are um’ they’re my weakness too”. The statement was clear and evident that Mr. Eden had a weakness towards young girls despite his affair and showing interest to older ladies. Another evidence is that Mr. Eden not having an interest in her wife for some time was a reason for other interest in other women, Barbara being one of them.
Another evidence is Margaret confirming that Miss Linnet was going to their house as said earlier by Linda Mason, Margaret started that, “there was another person whom they were unofficial aunt, and uncle too, that came in the house but never lasted for long, only came for a brief time. Margaret also testified that Mason’s suggestion could be prosperous; hence she could not be surprised by Mr. Eden’s allegations of assaults. The police officer’s evidence was a shred of expert evidence concerning Eden’s corrupt nature for wanting to bribe the police by stating that “let’s talk like men”. The statement was proof that Eden was guilty and knew what he had done was wrong; hence he wanted to get away with it as usual from other cases, such as that from Miss Lawton and Maison. The clothes brought in court were evidence of what Barbara was saying concerning the day, including the chain and pendant that Mr. Eden was wearing when Charlie arrived. On the other hand, him wearing the chain and the pendant, it was evident that Barbara and Mr. Eden were together on that Saturday afternoon if he denied the allegations.
6. BRIEFLY IDENTIFY WHAT EXCLUSIONARY RULES OF EVIDENCE WERE USED AND HOW THEY OPERATED DURING THE TRIAL.
Circumstantial evidence is one of the exclusionary rules used during the trial, such as the witnesses testifying about their encounter with Mr. Eden and how they have been victims and witnesses of his bad behavior of assault, such as Miss Mason. For instance, the proof was based on opinion evidence, evidence of a habit, and reputation in the community, which played a significant role in judging the defendant’s actions towards the victim. Maison testified concerning a past event, and Miss Lawton testified his reputation and experience from another person for touching her behind and firing them. According to the law, evidence of reputations is way better and considered compared to evidence of reputations, as an exclusionary law, to avoid unfair treatment and distractions of the objective and expert evidence. Making charges without consulting a person in the department is an exclusionary rule that can be conducted to take the case to court, especially if the defendants have other prior cases or a reputation of assault, such as in Mr. Eden’s case. Police officers collecting evidence in a friendly and flirty manner, such as smoking a cigarette, was a way of getting evidence, especially considering that Mr. Eden a Charlie were friends.
WHAT WAS THE VERDICT?
Mr Eden was charged innocent for theft accusations, which involved stealing Barbara’s Silver chain and pendant worth seven pounds, and Guilty for indecency assault towards Barbara, who is a minor.
7. GIVING REASONS FOR YOUR ANSWER STATE WHETHER YOU AGREED WITH THE VERDICT.
I agree with the verdict provided in court, based on the pieces of evidence and witness testimonials provided in court. The verdict was, however, made based on the United Kingdom laws concerning theft and sexual assault. The theft Act of 1978 provide that a recent possession of an item should be proved to have been stolen and the jury application of common sense concerning the events surrounding the theft. Mr. Eden’s possession of the chain and the pendant was not a result of stealing by sexual fantasies of Barbara and as a way of teasing Barbara into sexual activity . According to theft laws, theft is intentionally and permanently holding someone’s property with the intention of not returning, and the definition provided in the 1978 act section one to six. The theft case was not well supported by evidence from the prosecutors’ side, but the defense won by stating that the chai and pendant were on the floor, hence decided to wear them instead of putting them n the pocket. Also, Mr. Eden had no other allegations concerning theft or possession of illegal times before making the allegations weak and unsupported. Furthermore, Barbara had no enough proof regarding Mr. Eden removing the pendant and faceting it on his neck as claimed in court.
Furthermore, Mr. Eden appeared guilty of indecent assault, which was proved by enough evidence and testimonials. The testimony of Barbara, Mason, Lawton and the home mother was enough to charge Mr. Eden for assault. Also, Eden’s defensive and arrogant nature was an indication that he was guilty and looked for a way to escape the charges through telling lies. On the other hand, Mr. Eden had a tendency and behavior of touching women, including minors, where he indirectly stated that he had a weakness in young girls. Mr. Eden also denied all the allegations, which was suspicious, and maintained his excellent name and reputation instead of facing the truth. The exhibits presented in court, such as Barbara’s pendant, and chain, the clothes, lying about calling Barbara, and calling the wife to know when she would return was suspicious and proved the chronology of planned events.
I agree that Mr. Eden is a sexual offender based on his actions towards the arrest wanting to bribe Charlie, smoking together, and using the friendship to get away with his actions. Mr. Eden was guilty and did not have people and evidence to support him as the “good” man he claimed to be because he was guilty of his actions. Based on the Sexual Offense Act of 2003, sexual offense charges include rape and other offense charges against minors . Others include inciting a minor to engage in sexual activities, holding sexual communication with minors, which also involves abuse of a position of power to engage in sexual activity with a minor, such as in the case of Mr. Eden. According to Section 25 of the Act, Mr. Eden abused the trust and position as unofficial uncle to engage in sexual activities with Barbara. She is a minor, which can also be considered a familial child sex offense. Mr. Eden also arranged to have sex with a minor, which is evident when he called the wife Margaret to confirm when he returned home. According to Sections 16-19, Mr. Eden was guilty of the exception of the spouse committing sexual activity with Barbara. This is evident when he lies to Barbara that Mrs. Eden is around, knowing very well that she would not come back home.
Bibliography
Cossins, A. N. N. E. Closing the Justice Gap for Adult and Child Sexual Assault. Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2020.
The Sexual Offense Act of 2003
The Theft Act of 1978
Jez T, ‘Crown Court – A Man With Everything (1978)’
