Good Character in Criminal Trials: Directions, Evidence and ...

Introduction

In criminal cases we usually hear more about “bad character” than “good character”. Yet many defendants have no previous convictions, and a well‑judged good character application can help the jury or magistrates assess both the reliability of the defendant’s account and the likelihood of guilt. It is not automatic, and it is not a defence, but when done properly it can make a real difference to how a case is understood.

This guide explains what “good character” means in practice, how and when to seek a direction, what a typical direction looks like, and the common traps to avoid.

What You'll Learn

• What counts as good character and how to prove it
• The two parts of the good character direction: credibility and propensity
• The difference between absolute and qualified good character
• When a direction is given, tailored, or withheld
• How to prepare character evidence and witnesses
• Case law including R v Vye, R v Aziz and R v Hunter
• Practical steps for the Crown Court and magistrates’ court

Core Concepts

What counts as good character

• Absolute good character

  • No previous convictions, cautions, reprimands or warnings
  • No other credible evidence of discreditable behaviour
  • Typically attracts both limbs of the direction, subject to the judge’s discretion on fairness

• Qualified (or effective) good character

  • There are previous matters (e.g. old, minor, or plainly irrelevant to the present charge)
  • The judge may give a modified direction or decline one if fairness or relevance would be undermined
  • The exact wording is adapted to the facts

Important points:

• Good character is not a defence. It is background material that may assist the tribunal of fact.
• Spent convictions are not automatically excluded in criminal proceedings; they may still be admissible if justice requires.
• The direction is personal to the defendant. In a multi‑handed trial, the judge should tailor directions for each defendant.

The two limbs: credibility and propensity

• Credibility limb

  • If a defendant gives evidence, the jury may be directed that a person of good character is generally more likely to be truthful.
  • If the defendant does not give evidence, this limb will not normally be given.

• Propensity limb

  • The jury may be told that the absence of previous offending can make it less likely that the defendant committed the offence now charged.
  • This limb may apply whether or not the defendant gives evidence, provided good character is established.

Weight:

• The judge explains that the weight to attach to good character is a matter for the jury or magistrates. It must not be overstated, and it must be considered alongside all the evidence.

Absolute vs qualified good character

• Absolute good character

  • Generally attracts both credibility and propensity limbs, unless it would be unfair or misleading in the specific context.
  • Example: a 45‑year‑old with no record and no adverse material.

• Qualified good character

  • Previous matters exist but are old or irrelevant, or the Crown agrees they should not count against the defendant.
  • The judge may:
    • Give a full direction, or
    • Give a modified direction (e.g. credibility limb only), or
    • Decline a direction if it would be wrong to give credit where it is not justified.
  • Example: a decades‑old minor motoring conviction in a theft trial may still allow a modified direction.

Key caution:

• If there is evidence of other discreditable conduct (even without a conviction), the judge has discretion to refuse or limit the direction.

Proving good character and using character witnesses

How to establish good character:

• Obtain the agreed antecedents (PNC print) early.
• Check for any non‑conviction information that might be raised by the Crown.
• Consider calling character witnesses or using written testimonials.

Choosing character witnesses:

• Prefer witnesses of apparent independence and credibility (e.g. long‑standing employer, community figure).
• Prepare them carefully. They should speak to the defendant’s honesty, reliability and general behaviour, not the merits of the case itself.
• Warn witnesses not to stray into areas that could trigger bad character rebuttal. Keep the focus on long‑term conduct, not hearsay or speculation.

Risks to manage:

• Calling character evidence does not, by itself, “open the door” to all bad character, but it may invite rebuttal on specific points.
• Avoid “attacking” other witnesses’ character without good reason, as that can trigger admission of the defendant’s bad character under statutory rules.

Procedure and timing

• Raise the issue early

  • Flag the intention to seek a good character direction at the PTPH or as soon as practicable.
  • Invite the court to rule on absolute vs qualified status and the terms of any direction before the defence commits to calling evidence.

• Agree the terms where possible

  • Provide a short note or draft direction tailored to the facts.
  • The Crown can run checks; the judge can settle precise wording.

• Keep a clear record

  • Ensure any ruling is recorded.
  • At the close of evidence, remind the judge that a direction is required and confirm the agreed form.

• Magistrates’ court

  • Ask the legal adviser to direct the bench on both limbs where appropriate.
  • If refused, invite brief reasons for the record.

• Appeals

  • If no point was taken at trial and counsel agreed the directions, an appeal later is less likely to succeed.
  • Preserve the issue by raising it early and clearly.

Key Examples or Case Studies

R v Vye [1993] 1 WLR 471

• Point: Established that a defendant of good character will, as a general rule, be entitled to a direction on both credibility and propensity (subject to the facts).
• Takeaway: Treat the two limbs as distinct; ask for each where justified.

R v Aziz [1995] 2 AC 190

• Point: The House of Lords confirmed that fairness governs whether and how the direction is given. If there is credible evidence of discreditable conduct, a full direction may be inappropriate.
• Takeaway: The judge retains discretion. Good character is not a “badge” to be conferred regardless of context.

R v Hunter [2015] EWCA Crim 631

• Point: Provided modern guidance: defined absolute vs qualified good character and emphasised careful, tailored directions rather than formulaic wording.
• Takeaway: Identify which category applies, draft a case‑specific direction, and avoid over‑claiming.

Worked scenario: old, irrelevant conviction

• Facts: D is 52, with a single, non‑violent conviction from age 19. Charged with a recent fraud. He testifies.
• Likely approach: Seek a qualified good character direction. Proposed wording: credibility limb given in full; propensity limb may be cautiously framed given the age and irrelevance of the old conviction.
• Practical note: Agree a short form of direction that acknowledges the historic matter while still allowing the jury to consider the general value of a near‑clean life.

Practical Applications

• Make the status call early

  • Obtain antecedents; identify absolute vs qualified; check for any non‑conviction material.
  • If qualified, prepare reasons why a direction is still fair (age of conviction, nature, relevance).

• Plan the evidence

  • Decide whether the defendant will give evidence; if not, you are unlikely to get the credibility limb.
  • Select character witnesses who are credible and measured. Use short, focused statements or brief oral evidence.

• Protect against rebuttal

  • Keep witness evidence to conduct and reputation; avoid making sweeping claims that are easy to challenge.
  • Warn the defendant about “attacking” others (s.105 CJA 2003) which may let in his own bad character.

• Formalise the application

  • Serve a short written note setting out the basis for the direction, with proposed wording.
  • Invite a pre‑evidence ruling so both sides know the court’s likely approach.

• Check the direction given

  • Ask the judge to cover:
    • Good character is not a defence.
    • Credibility limb (if D testifies).
    • Propensity limb (as appropriate).
    • Weight is for the jury.
  • In multi‑handed trials, request separate directions for each defendant as needed.

• Magistrates’ court specifics

  • Ask the legal adviser to give a clear direction on both limbs where justified.
  • If the bench declines, seek reasons and record the point.

• Post‑verdict considerations

  • If the direction was refused or mis‑stated, ensure the note of the ruling, summing‑up, and your submissions is complete.
  • Be realistic: where the issue was not raised or was expressly agreed, an appeal is harder.

Summary Checklist

• Confirm absolute or qualified good character on the papers
• Identify whether the defendant will give evidence (credibility limb)
• Prepare and serve a short note with proposed wording
• Choose measured, credible character witnesses (if any)
• Seek an early ruling and record it
• At the close of evidence, remind the judge about the agreed direction
• Check the summing‑up or legal adviser’s direction covers both limbs correctly
• In multi‑handed trials, secure tailored directions for each defendant
• Keep a record of refusals and reasons for any appeal route

Quick Reference