FACT PATTERN ONE

In your answer you should
a) identify the facts in issue and assign the burdens and standards of proof,
b) identify potential items of evidence,
c) put those items into the order in which they would appear at trial
d) discuss the potential inferences to be drawn from such evidence and how these relate to the facts in issue
e) address any legal questions that may arise about the use of such evidence, such as admissibility. You are expected to cite relevant statutory or case authority and to discuss that authority in the necessary depth.

Problem question structure
Introduction
In the introduction you must examine the issues in the case. Facts in issue

.Live facts in issue . What the prosecution In The case is going to have to prove

State who the legal, evidential burden is on and what standard that must be proved to. Usually, legal burden a standard beyond reasonable doubt or enough to satisfy the jury tonne sure
Evidential burden sufficient person

Produce a list of prosecution evidence( no explanation in the list needed)
When writing the list you can number the evidence if one person has multiple pieces of evidence

Produce a list of evidence for defence( usually short and not more than 3 or4)
DEFENDANT IS ALWAYS THE FIRST THING IN THE LIST OF DEFENDANT EVIDENCE

Prosecution evidence list

1.Pamelas found to be murdered
a) body found near her home
b) Strangled to death be ligature

2.similar bricks used to weigh down Pamela’s body and to repair Bobby’s Garden wall

3.Pamelas statement about being bruised by Bobby

4.Pamela’s statement on Bobby’s search history

5.Carters statement on Pamela’s disappearance and Bobby holding sack

6. Charlie Wade expert evidence

7. Bobby purchase of a one-way ticket to Cuba

8. Bobby’s Confession to his mother

Defence evidence list

1.Bobby

2.Expert to counter Dr Ewing

3.Carter statement on normalcy

4.Potential commonness of bricks

Under section 79 of PACE if defendant is giving evidence he MUST go first

Analysis

What kind of evidence
What fact in issue does it go to
What inference or inference scan be drawn from that piece of evidence
What makes the evidence admissible I.e is it relevant
What rules relate to that evidence

State if the witness is competent and or compellable

When discussing the evidence. Start with prosecution evidence them counter with how the defence would like to counter that point.

ATTORMEY GENERALS RFEEEMCE NUMBER 2 of 2002

The defence may get their own expert to undermine the evidence of the prosecutions cctv expert witness

When you get to the end of the prosecution’s evidence you need a heading called “half-time submission” in which you discuss whether or not defendant would be able to persuade the judge to dismiss the case because of insufficient evidence. Make it’s decent sized paragraph

Suella Lucy second hand hearsay

Defence list
Potential commonness of the bricks

Another expert to question dr Ewing

If bringing in bad character. State how the bad character is relevant to the case.
Then how it it admissible
PROBLEM QUESTION
Bobby is charged with the murder of his wife Pamela.
Pamela’s body was found at the bottom of a lake near the couple’s home ten years after she disappeared in August 2013. Back in 2013, Bobby reported her disappearance to the police. He had also told his mother that Pamela had told him that she had been having an affair with a man called Ken and had taken her clothes, passport and other personal items with her. A bag containing woman’s clothes has been found on the lake floor close to the body.
A forensic examination of the body confirmed that Pamela was killed by strangulation with a ligature. Due to the body being in water for a long time, there was no other forensic evidence that could be obtained.
The prosecution allege that Bobby had become obsessively jealous, strangled Pamela and placed her body in a sack weighted down with bricks. Similar bricks were used in the building of a garden wall in the couple’s house, although there is no evidence when this was constructed.
The police investigated the disappearance at the time and took statements from, Sue Ellen, Lucy and Carter.
Sue Ellen was Pamela’s best friend. A couple of days before Pamela’s disappearance, Sue Ellen and Pamela met for coffee. During the conversation, Sue Ellen saw that Pamela had a bruised eye. Pamela recounted how the injury was caused by Bobby. She said that she was very unhappy and wanted to leave. Sue Ellen offered her a place to stay.

Pamela said she would think about it. At no stage did she mention that she was having an affair.
Lucy was Pamela’s work colleague. Over lunch with Lucy one day, Pamela described how Bobby was becoming depressed and angry with her. She would not say why. Pamela told Lucy that she had searched her husband’s internet search entries. There she found that he was using search phrases such as ‘how to commit murder’, ‘strangulation’ and ‘ligature’. She thought it might have something to do with his work as a criminologist but could not be sure.
Carter was a next-door neighbour. He told the police that as far as he was concerned, Bobby and Pamela were a ‘regular’ couple. He had never heard arguments coming from the house. He recalled that there was an occasion around the time when Pamela is said to have gone missing, when he saw Bobby carrying a sack to his car. He also confirmed that he also recalls how Bobby would be depressed and often speak of his wife running off with her lover, Ken.
During the initial police investigation, the police enquired about Pamela’s bank card use. It materialised that the couple only had joint accounts. Pamela did not have any accounts in her sole name. There had been a cash withdrawal from their joint savings account (£15,000) the week before Pamela’s disappearance. At the time, when asked about it, Bobby had said that he had no idea that the money had been taken. The bank where the withdrawal had taken place was contacted and CCTV checked at the time. A woman wearing sunglasses and a large hat was captured. At the time Bobby identified the person as his wife. The footage has now been re-examined. Due to advances in technology, the footage has been enhanced and owing to a new and novel technique, Dr. Ewing is able to say that the image shows that it was Bobby, dressed in women’s clothing, who was at the bank on the day of the large cash withdrawal.
News of the body being found was broadcast on local television. This caused Charlie Wade to come forward. In the year after Pamela’s disappearance, Bobby became mentally unbalanced and lost his job. However, he then received counselling from Charlie and was able to resume work. Charlie has now been questioned by the police and will testify that in the counselling sessions, Bobby behaved more like a bereaved husband rather than an abandoned one, often speaking of Pamela in the past tense and clearly implying that he believed her to be dead.
Furthermore, the police were also contacted by Patricia, Bobby’s mother. Patricia is 85 years of age and suffers from dementia. Owing to her age and vulnerability, police conducted an ABE interview. In the interview she was very confused and lost her train of thought at times. She stated that in Christmas 2020, Bobby came to stay with her. One evening after a few glasses of wine, Bobby told her that he had ‘done away with Pamela” and that it was the “best thing to do”.
Bobby was arrested after the body was found. He was taken to the police station. He was searched and his mobile phone seized. It was locked, so PC Trotter held it in front of Bobby’s face to access it. He looked at Bobby’s emails. They revealed that on the day the body was found, he had booked a one-way flight to Cuba for the following week.
In his interview under caution, Bobby maintained that Pamela had in fact run off with her lover, Ken, and that it was Bobby’s guess that Ken was the killer. The police have been unable to find anyone named Ken who was associated with Pamela and the prosecution intend in cross-examination, to suggest that Bobby was inventing this story. Bobby denied that he went to the bank dressed in his wife’s clothes and as for Charlie Wade (his counsellor) she must be mistaken.
Sue Ellen died four years ago in a car accident. The police have tried tracing Lucy but cannot find her. Carter has been found but says that he does not want to drag up the past and if he is made to come to court, he is just going to say nothing. He has been summonsed.
Bobby has no previous convictions or cautions recorded against him.
Discuss the evidential issues that may arise at trial, having regard to the rubric at the start of the question.

Last Completed Projects