{"title":"‘Well, the burden never shifts, but it does’: celebrity, property offences and judicial innovation in Woolmington v DPP","authors":"K. Crosby","doi":"10.1017/lst.2022.25","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In his 1935 judgment in Woolmington v DPP, Viscount Sankey declared the prosecution's burden of proving the accused's guilt was a ‘golden thread’, running ‘throughout the whole web of English criminal law’. This paper explores what Woolmington can tell us about the appeals process – and about the criminal law itself – less than 30 years after the first automatic right to appeal was created in English criminal law. It argues that the decision helps us understand the political pressures that could help to form – and make possible – legal decisions during this period. And it finds that the Woolmington decision itself – both in the text of the decision and in its immediate reception – was more universal than it was fundamental. Woolmington, I argue, has always been more about the high-level principles of English criminal law than about securing any kind of minimal procedural rights for a defendant.","PeriodicalId":46121,"journal":{"name":"Legal Studies","volume":"43 1","pages":"104 - 121"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/lst.2022.25","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract In his 1935 judgment in Woolmington v DPP, Viscount Sankey declared the prosecution's burden of proving the accused's guilt was a ‘golden thread’, running ‘throughout the whole web of English criminal law’. This paper explores what Woolmington can tell us about the appeals process – and about the criminal law itself – less than 30 years after the first automatic right to appeal was created in English criminal law. It argues that the decision helps us understand the political pressures that could help to form – and make possible – legal decisions during this period. And it finds that the Woolmington decision itself – both in the text of the decision and in its immediate reception – was more universal than it was fundamental. Woolmington, I argue, has always been more about the high-level principles of English criminal law than about securing any kind of minimal procedural rights for a defendant.
桑基子爵(Viscount Sankey)在1935年伍尔明顿诉民进党案(Woolmington v DPP)的判决中宣称,控方证明被告有罪的责任是一条“金线”,贯穿“英国刑法的整个网络”。本文探讨了伍明顿可以告诉我们的关于上诉程序——以及刑法本身——在英国刑法中首次设立自动上诉权不到30年的时间里。它认为,这一决定有助于我们理解在这一时期可能有助于形成(并使之成为可能)法律决定的政治压力。它还发现,伍明顿判决本身——无论是在判决书的文本中还是在它的直接接受中——都是普遍的,而不是根本的。我认为,伍明顿一直更多地关注的是英国刑法的高级原则,而不是确保被告的最低限度的程序权利。