Report and Recommendations - Scottish Government

the criminal justice system. Removing the requirement would requiresignificant changes in perception for the police, the Crown, defence agents andcounsel and the courts 67 . Such a change should only be recommended if it isdemonstrated to have a positive aspect.The case for retaining corroboration7.2.36 The principal justification for retaining the requirement for corroboration isclear. It is the same as that stated by Hume 68 ; that it provides some protectionagainst miscarriages of justice. The requirement, it is argued, reduces theprospect of miscarriages of justice occurring as a result of a judge or juryconvicting an accused or the basis of a single piece of testimony that is untrueor unreliable. Evidence can be fallible in a number of ways. A witness maybe deliberately lying. Contrary to some popular belief, or at least expectation,witnesses do frequently lie in the criminal courts. Their motives for doing sowill vary but at least some will be anxious, for reasons perceived by them tobe sound, to see that the accused is convicted. That may be because of maliceor, more likely, because they are convinced, from information received orotherwise, that the accused committed the crime. Such witnesses maytherefore come to court prepared to lie, either on their own or in combinationwith others. Despite skilful cross-examination, the lies may remain undetectedby the judge or jury.7.2.37 Even more problematic can be the witness who is attempting to tell the truth,and perhaps trying to be as helpful as possible to the court, but is simply67 see Crowe, supra68 see para 7.1.2276