A Western Australian social justice campaigner has called for an end to ‘Oath against Oath’ court cases in which verdicts are based on one person’s word against another’s instead of the more demanding requirement to prove a case beyond reasonable doubt.
Octogenarian Brian Tennant (pictured) has made the call claiming that Oath against Oath trials could lead to innocent people having their lives “totally and unjustly destroyed” by the Criminal Justice System.
Mr Tennant said an Oath against Oath trial was where the only evidence given was verbal evidence. The jury listened to the evidence and then decided whether the accused was guilty or not.
“There are many reasons why a person would make false accusations, whether it be envy, jealousy, maliciousness or even being financially motivated,” Mr Tennant said.
“If all an innocent person can say is ‘No, I didn’t do it’ and the accuser then describes the accusation in detail, it is very difficult for an innocent person to rebuke and defend such accusations.”
He said that as an activist for fairness and civil liberties, he had heard of experiences where people have had false accusations made against them.
“For some, the false allegations have led to an Oath against Oath trial followed by imprisonment for something they didn’t do.”
He said that in the search for justice, theatrics should have little bearing in determining a person’s innocence or guilt.
“Oath against Oath Trials are unsafe as innocent people are being mistakenly convicted and imprisoned unjustly,” Mr Tennant said.
“Such trials should be stopped in the name of fairness,” he said.
He also recommended courts leave open the discretion to exercise home detention as a punishment when it is satisfied the ‘offender’ poses no real risk of reoffending, has advanced age or health related problems.
