Click here to obtain a Word version of this document for adaptation
In this case, [identify how issue of whether the witness has a motive to lie has been raised]. The [suggestion/implication] is that NOW had no reason to give false evidence.
Remember, it is for the prosecution to prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that the accused is guilty. You can only convict NOA of [insert offence] if, on the basis of all the evidence, you are satisfied of his/her guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The accused does not have to prove that NOW had a reason for giving false evidence.
It would therefore be wrong to think that unless you can find a reason for NOW to give false evidence, then NOW must be telling the truth. If you did that, you would be expecting NOA to prove his/her innocence. And that would be contrary to the rule that the prosecution must prove the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Last updated: 2 October 2017