|
Ni le système du jury ni l'intégrité de la justice criminelle ne sont bien servis par la perpétuation de fictions. Le débat actuel dans les tribunaux et les journaux spécialisés sur la question de savoir si l'erreur doit être fondée, est important sur le plan conceptuel pour l'évolution harmonieuse du droit criminel, mais, à mon avis, c'est sans importance pratique, parce qu'il est peu probable que le jury croie l'accusé qui déclare être dans l'erreur à moins que celle‑ci ne soit, aux yeux du jury, fondée sur des motifs raisonnables.
|
|
Perpetuation of fictions does little for the jury system or the integrity of criminal justice. The ongoing debate in the courts and learned journals as to whether mistake must be reasonable is conceptually important in the orderly development of the criminal law, but in my view, practically unimportant because the accused's statement that he was mistaken is not likely to be believed unless the mistake is, to the jury, reasonable. The jury will be concerned to consider the reasonableness of any grounds found, or asserted to be available, to support the defence of mistake. Although "reasonable grounds" is not a precondition to the availability of a plea of honest belief in consent, those grounds determine the weight to be given the defence. The reasonableness, or otherwise, of the accused's belief is only evidence for, or against, the view that the belief was actually held and the intent was, therefore, lacking.
|