Examines judicial dilution of the doctrine of corroboration applicable to Scottish criminal cases, under which evidence against the accused from two separate sources is required in order to obtain a conviction. Identifies certain dilutions as defensible and others as less justifiable dilutions of the impact of corroborative evidence. Suggests the corroboration requirement is not as good a safeguard against miscarriages of justice as some believe and that judicial refinement of the rule to avoid unmeritorious acquittals has led to unnecessary complexity, complications and anomalies.
|Number of pages||13|
|Journal||Criminal Law Review|
|Publication status||Published - 2012|