NCJ Number
80691
Date Published
1981
Length
42 pages
Annotation
This report by the Law Reform Commissioner of Victoria, Australia, discusses issues bearing upon the use of unsworn statements in criminal trials and presents pertinent recommendations.
Abstract
The background discussion covers the trial of indictable offenses, the use of unsworn statements in other countries and other jurisdictions of Australia, and the current use of the unsworn statement in Victoria. Arguments for and against abolition of the current right to unsworn statements in criminal trials are then presented. The main argument for abolition of the right to make an unsworn statement centers upon the principle that all factual material put before a jury should be subject to cross-examination, which would not be the case with an accused's unsworn statement. Those favoring the retention of the right of the accused to place an unsworn statement before the court argue that not all persons charged with criminal offenses are guilty and that among the innocent as among the guilty there are those who dread cross-examination, who suffer from a sense of inadequacy in the face of a skilled and intimidating prosecutor, or who fear the exposure of some aspect of their lives unrelated to the charge. The report recommends retention of the right of an accused to make an unsworn statement. When an accused makes an unsworn statement, it is recommended that the right of comment on the failure to give evidence on oath be vested in both the prosecution and the presiding judge, subject to the stipulations set in R. v. Simic. It is recommended that it be made clear to the jury that the accused's rights to make an unsworn statement and to give evidence on oath are not cumulative rights, but alternative courses of action available. Appended are relevant statutes, statistics relating to unsworn statements, and data on trends in conviction rates.