ABSTRACT
Character evidence is relevant mainly in criminal trials. The Criminal Justice Act (CJA) 2003, the common law recognised two ways in which such evidence could be relevant. It could be relevant to any witness's credibility, and it could also be relevant to the likelihood of a defendant's guilt. In cases such as Gray, Goss, Teeluck and John, and Payton, evidence of bad character was primarily relevant to guilt, where the prosecution was allowed to introduce it as part of its case against a defendant under the rules relating to similar fact evidence. The Court of Appeal usually considers the new legislation on evidence of bad character on frequent occasions. Guidelines have been given in some cases to help trial judges to apply the statutory rules. One of the most important of the guidelines in Hanson concerns the direction that a judge should give to a jury where evidence of previous convictions has been admitted.
