header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
17 February 2023 / Simon Parsons
Issue: 8013 / Categories: Features , Criminal , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail

Presumption of innocence: just empty rhetoric?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
111188
Is the ‘golden thread’ of Woolmington wearing thin? Simon Parsons examines the insanity defence & legal burdens of proof
  • The defence of insanity is the only common law exception to the Woolmington thread—the presumption of innocence. An accused person who raises the defence of insanity has the legal burden of proving it.
  • Woolmington should be extended to both limbs of the insanity defence, as it seems morally wrong to impose a legal burden of proof on accused persons in respect of both limbs where they have an extremely limited grasp of reality.

In the famous case of Woolmington v DPP [1935] AC 462, Reginald Woolmington and Violet Smith were married and set up home together, but Violet was unhappy, so she left Reginald and went home to her mother. Reginald was terribly upset, so he got a gun and decided to go to see Violet to persuade her to return to him. When they met, Reginald said: ‘Are you coming back?’ Violet replied no, and in response

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Slater Heelis—Charlotte Beck

Partner and Manchester office lead appointed head of family

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

Civil Justice Council—Nigel Teasdale

DWF insurance services director appointed to Civil Justice Council

R3—Jodie Wildridge

R3—Jodie Wildridge

Kings Chambers barrister appointed chair of R3 Yorkshire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Renters’ Rights revolution begins—brace for tribunal chaos

The abolition of assured shorthold tenancies and section 21 evictions marks the beginning of a ‘brave new world’ for England’s rental sector, writes Daniel Bacon of Seddons GSC

NLJ this week: Civil procedure gets a spring overhaul
Stephen Gold’s latest Civil Way column rounds up a flurry of procedural and regulatory changes reshaping housing, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and personal injury litigation
NLJ this week: Why GP complaints are going nowhere
Patients are being systematically failed by an NHS complaints regime that is opaque, poorly enforced and often stacked against them, argues Charles Davey of The Barrister Group
NLJ this week: Prenups meet a jurisdictional brick wall
A wealthy Russian divorce battle has produced a sharp warning about trying to challenge foreign nuptial agreements in the wrong English court. Writing in NLJ this week, Vanessa Friend and Robert Jackson of Hodge Jones & Allen examine Timokhin v Timokhina, where the High Court enforced Russian judgments arising from a prenuptial agreement despite arguments based on the landmark Radmacher decision
NLJ this week: Has Rylands v Fletcher come back from the dead?
An obscure Victorian tort may be heading for an unexpected revival after a significant Privy Council ruling that could reshape liability for dangerous escapes, according to Richard Buckley, barrister and emeritus professor of law at the University of Reading
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll