|
|
|
Home > Law > Law glossary > Law glossary
R v Goldberg (1988)
Last modified: Thu Feb 23 16:37:37 2006
(1988) 88 Cr App R 285 (CA). The defendant sought to have his confession
excluded under s.76(2)(b) of PACE, on the grounds that it was
elicited in circumstances which rendered it unreliable. He was a heroin
addict in withdrawal and, he claimed, only confessed because he needed to
get away to get another dose. However, the Court of Appeal held
that ``anything said or done'' in s.76(2)(b) meant ``anything said or done
by the police to the suspect''. It did not apply to unfavourable circumstance
which the suspect had brought on himself.
It is not entirely straightforward to reconcile this case with
RVMcGovern1990, where the defendant's confession was excluded because
it was made unreliable by her pregnancy and vomiting. McGovern's
preganancy was no more something `said or done' by the police than
Goldberg's heroin addiction.
CaseLaw
EvidenceLaw
Law glossary index
|
|
|
|
Shameless plug
|
 By the author of this site. Buy on-line from Amazon USA | UK
|
|