ABSTRACT
This chapter analyses how the courts handle suspicious evidence through hypothetical and real case studies. It discusses the nature and purpose of corroboration evidence through a brief historical overview. The chapter highlights how corroboration and care warnings are used through a discussion on the related rationale that underpins them. It outlines the importance and significance of Lucas directions and Turnbull warnings through an analysis of their respective functions. The essence of corroborative evidence is that one creditworthy witness confirms what another creditworthy witness has said. Prior to the enactment of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (CJA), corroboration warnings, where sworn or unsworn evidence of a child was tendered, were routine occurrences; this requirement was also abolished by the CJA 1988. A trial judge has the discretion to give a care warning where the evidence against an accused emanates from a witness who could potentially hold a grudge against the defendant.
