What fall under the category "previous" in a court case

Sickofthesickness

Hi,

Hoping someone with legal knowledge can clear this up for me. If you're in court and the judge asks the guard/dpp has the defendant any previous would this mean conviction,arrests, charges? Is it possible or would it make sense in any aspect whereby it is said that defendant has no previous yet has been up and down to court, seeing solicitors constantly and a whole string of charges made against them all overlapping with the court case where no previous was said.

Peregrinus

We're talking criminal cases, right? Questions about previous convictions are not normally asked until you have been convicted of the present offence. The fact that you committed robbery A three years ago is generally not evidence that you committed robbery B for which you are now being tried, so it won't — can't, in fact — be mentioned. (There can be exceptions to this rule, but they are rare.) But once you have been convicted of robbery B, then they'll look at prior convictions as a factor in deciding what sentence to give you.

It's only prior convictions that get mentioned. Acquittals or charges that were dropped are not mentioned. Everyone is entitled to the presumption of innocence so, unless and until you are convicted of an offence, you are treated as not having committed it. The fact that you were acquitted of robbery A is not something that will be taken into account in deciding what sentence to give you for robbery B.

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058304693/what-fall-under-the-category-previous-in-a-court-case

It's only convictions that matter.

Charges without conviction are irrelevant - as the inference is that you were not guilty (legally) of the charge.

Arrest even less relevant. You can be arrested without ever having broken a law or put a foot wrong. It is certainly not a "previous".

As an aside, A judge would rarely be so casual as to say "Any previous?". Most of the time ask with a full sentence. "Any previous convictions"

Peregrinus

The jargon in the trade is "form" — as in, "has he form?" But, yeah, in court they'll use more formal language.

Sickofthesickness

Thanks for the replies. Judge just say any previous and was told no previous. There's supposedly ongoing issues and person in question could be getting locked up and has a ton of charges. Criminal charges. Court case mentioned is family law if that helps.

Claw Hammer

Pending charges are never mentioned and convictions for offences which occurred after the offence in question are not taken into account. It is often a defence tactic to try and have the offence which is the more recent dealt with first. The other pending offence cant be mentioned. When the first offence is dealt with the other is not relevant.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120840070#Comment_120840070

When those other charges are dealt with, and if a conviction results, this first conviction will of course be mentioned when sentencing for those charges is addressed.

Sickofthesickness

Thanks for the responses. I guess in a nutshell I want to know if this story is plausible. I had a family law case with said individual 2 months ago and gardai said he'd no previous. I've now been told on the QT and in confidence that he has been up and down to court and has a stack of charges against him which he will most likely go to jail for. Apparently this has been going on for a number of years (and while I was with him). As you can imagine it's a shock to the system to have absolutely no idea this was going on behind your back. I'm just struggling to wrap my head around the truth that something so serious went on right under my nose. And with the whole no previous thing i'm totally confused.

Claw Hammer

How would previous be relevant in a family law case? Was it a criminal case in a family context?

Sickofthesickness

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120842445#Comment_120842445

It was a breach of a protection order

Peregrinus

I assume he was convicted of breaching the protection order; otherwise the question about previous convictions would not arise.

Presumably the other charges against him are still pending so, as of now (or, rather, as of the time he was convicted of breaching the protection order) he has no previous convictions, and that is what the guards will say when asked in court.

If these other charges weren't mentioned in court, how did you learn of them?

Sickofthesickness

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120844437#Comment_120844437

He was convicted and had been arrested. Its a long story how I know. It sound serious enough. If these actions were going on while I was with him is there a chance I could be dragged in to this?

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120844801#Comment_120844801

Were you involved in or aware of these other offences? Do you know of any facts or circumstances that would make the guards think that you were involved in or aware of these offences? Have you been approached or interviewed by the guards in relation to these other offences?

Don't post the answers here. But if the answer to each of these questions is "no" then it is most unlikely that you will be dragged in.

(It's relevant to ask here whether you are, or were at the time, married to your partner. If so, you can't be required to give evidence against him and it's unlikely that the guards will want to speak to you even as a possible witness to some of his offences.)

Sickofthesickness

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120844920#Comment_120844920

Not married. I'd no idea of any of this. He is a pathological liar. I recently found out he was barred from a premises for selling drugs and apparently blame was pointed at me which is absolutely henious if you knew me. I'd imagine this comes from his family particularly his mother. God knows what else will come out. I'm just not putting up with it if they start slandering my name again. I'm considering cease and desist but don't know if it will help

Mellor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120840070#Comment_120840070

Criminal charges are not the same as convictions. A string of serious charges wouldn't be included in previous convictions.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120844801#Comment_120844801

If he was convicted (or the serious offence), should he not have been in prison? TO be honest, it sounds like you are either conflating charges and confections. Or the second-hand information you were told on the QT is not a complete view of the situation.

Peregrinus

Mellor, I think SotS is saying that her partner was convicted of breaching the protection order, at which point the guards said (correctly) that he had no previous convictions. It seems this is his first conviction though at the time of the conviction other charges were pending (and still are) . She is concerned that she may suffer adverse legal or reputational consequences, even though she had no involvement with or awareness of her partner's actions that underlie the pending charges.

Sickofthesickness

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120848915#Comment_120848915

That's exactly it. I've had all sorts of accusations made against me throughout the relationship. I don't need this on top of it.