Admissible and Reliable Evidence
Ever wondered why some evidence gets thrown out of court even when it seems important? Admissible evidence must be obtained legally - if police break the law to get it, it can't be used in trial.
Take searching someone's flat without a warrant or using entrapment (tricking suspects into confessing). The Brendan Daccey case shows how this can go wrong - police manipulated someone with learning difficulties into confessing to murder, leading to a wrongful conviction.
You've got the right to silence as a fundamental protection. This means you don't have to answer questions or prove your innocence because you're innocent until proven guilty. However, staying silent about specific things (like possession of a weapon) might make the jury suspicious, unless you've got a believable reason.
Reliable evidence must be credible, authentic and accurate - basically, would the jury believe it? Evidence can't be tampered with or forged. Courts sometimes consider character evidence about defendants (like previous lies or similar crimes), but this is heavily restricted to keep things fair.
Key Point: Evidence rules protect you from unfair treatment whilst ensuring juries get trustworthy information to make their decisions.
