Study guide
6.3 Defendant Bad Character Evidence
UK Bar — Criminal Litigation, Evidence and Sentencing Exam
Track your progress as you read
Finished sections get a check mark.
1 Chapter 1: Introduction & BSB Assessment Overview
1.1 BSB Centralised Assessment Structure & Regulations 1.2 Overriding Objective & Court Structure 1.3 Classification of Offences, Court Jurisdiction & Funding
2 Chapter 2: Commencing Proceedings, Charges & Allocation
2.1 Commencing Proceedings & Police Station Procedure 2.2 First Hearing & Classification of Offences 2.3 Allocation and Mode of Trial 2.4 Sending for Trial & Committal for Sentence 2.5 Youth Court & Special Allocation Rules 2.6 Sentencing Powers of the Youth Court
3 Chapter 3: Bail, Remand & Case Management
3.1 Right to Bail & Statutory Exceptions 3.2 Bail Conditions, Breach & Appeals 3.3 Remands, Adjournments & Custody Time Limits 3.4 Case Management & Pre-Trial Hearings 3.5 Prosecution & Defence Disclosure
4 Chapter 4: Indictments & Preparation for Trial in the Crown Court
4.1 The Indictment: Form, Content, Time Limits & Specimen Counts 4.2 Joinder, Severance, Amendment & Voluntary Bills 4.3 Arraignment, Pleas & Change of Plea 4.4 PTPH, Applications to Dismiss & Offering No Evidence
5 Chapter 5: Criminal Evidence — General Principles & PACE Exclusions
5.1 Preliminary Evidential Matters: Relevance, Admissibility & Tribunals 5.2 Burden and Standard of Proof & Presumptions 5.3 Confession Evidence & Mandatory Exclusion 5.4 Discretionary Exclusion of Unfair Evidence 5.5 Inferences from Silence
6 Chapter 6: Special Evidentiary Rules — Hearsay, Character & Identification
6.1 Hearsay Evidence & The Four Gateways 6.2 Hearsay Safeguards, Multiple Hearsay & Procedure 6.3 Defendant Bad Character Evidence 6.4 Non-Defendant Bad Character & Co-Defendant Character 6.5 Good Character, Proof of Convictions & Bad Character Procedure 6.6 Visual Identification & Turnbull Guidelines
7 Chapter 7: Witnesses, Privilege & Opinion Evidence
7.1 Witness Competence, Compellability & Special Measures 7.2 Oaths, Affirmations & Compelling Witness Attendance 7.3 Examination in Chief: Leading Questions, Memory Refreshing & Hostile Witnesses 7.4 Cross-Examination, Previous Inconsistent Statements & Re-Examination 7.5 Opinion Evidence & Expert Witnesses 7.6 Privilege, Public Interest Immunity & Immunity
8 Chapter 8: Trial Procedure in the Magistrates' Court & Crown Court
8.1 Magistrates' Court Trial Procedure 8.2 Summary Trial: Pre-Trial Rulings, Absence & Abuse of Process 8.3 Crown Court Trial Procedure 8.4 Jury Trial: Absence, Unrepresented Defendants & Abuse of Process 8.5 Speeches, Summing Up & Verdicts
9 Chapter 9: Sentencing Framework & Guidelines
9.1 Sentencing Framework, Principles & Procedure 9.2 Seriousness, Guilty Plea Reduction, Aggravation & Mitigation 9.3 Sentencing Procedure: Newton Hearings, Reports & Goodyear Indications 9.4 Custodial Sentences, Suspension & Release 9.5 Mandatory & Minimum Custodial Sentences 9.6 Community Orders, Fines & Discharges 9.7 Ancillary Orders, Costs & Dangerous Offenders
10 Chapter 10: Appeals & Post-Trial Remedies
10.1 Appeals from the Magistrates' Court (Crown Court & High Court Case Stated) 10.2 Rectifying Mistakes, Case Stated & Judicial Review 10.3 Crown Court Appeals (Court of Appeal Criminal Division & Supreme Court) 10.4 CACD Procedure: Rectification, Leave, Renewal, Loss of Time & Fresh Evidence 10.5 Prosecution Appeals, Attorney General's References & the CCRC
6.3 Defendant Bad Character Evidence
Key Takeaways Explain This Topic AI
Section 98 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 defines bad character as evidence of, or a disposition towards, misconduct, excluding evidence that has to do with the alleged facts of the offence charged or misconduct connected to the investigation or prosecution.
Defendant bad character is admissible only through one of the seven statutory gateways under Section 101(1)(a)-(g), most notably Gateway (d) (relevant to an important matter in issue between defendant and prosecution).
Under Section 103(1)(a), propensity to commit offences of the kind charged requires establishing that previous convictions show a propensity, that such propensity makes it more likely the defendant committed the offence, and that admitting the evidence is not unfair under R v Hanson.
Section 101(3) provides a mandatory fairness exclusion mechanism for Gateways (d) and (g), requiring the court to exclude bad character evidence if its admission would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of proceedings that the court ought not to admit it.
Bad character evidence admitted under Section 101 must be accompanied by tailored jury directions emphasizing that bad character cannot be used to bolster weak prosecution evidence or substitute for proof of the actus reus.
Last updated: August 2026
6.3 Defendant Bad Character Evidence
Prior to the enactment of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) , evidence of a defendant's past criminal record or misconduct was generally excluded under common law rules to prevent jury prejudice, subject to narrow similar-fact exceptions. Chapter 1 of Part 11 of the CJA 2003 created a modern statutory regime that abolished common law rules governing bad character evidence. The 2003 Act establishes a structured framework where bad character is admissible if it passes through specific statutory gateways, balanced by mandatory judicial discretions to exclude evidence that would compromise the fairness of the trial. This section examines the statutory definition of bad character, the seven defendant gateways under Section 101, the legal mechanics of propensity under Section 103, judicial guidelines in R v Hanson , statutory exclusion rules, and mandatory jury directions.
1. The Statutory Definition of Bad Character (s.98 CJA 2003)
Under Section 98 CJA 2003 , bad character is defined as evidence of, or of a disposition towards, misconduct , OTHER than evidence which:
Has to do with the alleged facts of the offence with which the defendant is charged; OR
Is evidence of misconduct in connection with the investigation or prosecution of that offence.
Key Concepts:
Misconduct (s.112 CJA 2003) : Defined as the commission of an offence or "other reprehensible behaviour". Reprehensible behaviour includes non-criminal acts reflecting moral blameworthiness, such as severe bullying, racism, dishonesty, or gang membership.
Offence Facts Exclusion : Evidence directly forming part of the narrative of the alleged crime (the res gestae or immediate background facts) is not bad character evidence; it is admitted as direct evidence of the offence itself.
Investigation Misconduct Exclusion : Lies told to police during interview regarding the current charge or attempts to intimidate witnesses in the present case fall outside s.98 definition and are dealt with under general evidence rules.
2. The Seven Defendant Gateways (s.101(1) CJA 2003)
In criminal proceedings, evidence of a defendant's bad character is inadmissible unless it is admitted through one of the seven statutory gateways set out in Section 101(1) CJA 2003 :
Gateway Statutory Provision Operational Description & Key Limits
Gateway (a) s.101(1)(a) All parties to the proceedings agree to the evidence being admitted.
Gateway (b) s.101(1)(b) The evidence is adduced by the defendant himself or is given in answer to a question asked by him in cross-examination (e.g. tactical disclosure).
Gateway (c) s.101(1)(c) It is important explanatory evidence (s.102: without it, the court or jury would find it impossible or difficult properly to understand other evidence).
Gateway (d) s.101(1)(d) It is relevant to an important matter in issue between the defendant and the prosecution (s.103: includes propensity to commit offences or propensity to be untruthful).
Gateway (e) s.101(1)(e) It has substantial probative value in relation to an important matter in issue between the defendant and a co-defendant (cut-throat defence).
Gateway (f) s.101(1)(f) It is evidence to correct a false impression given by the defendant (s.105: defendant creates a misleading impression about his character).
Gateway (g) s.101(1)(g) The defendant has made an attack on another person's character (s.106: defendant adduces evidence attacking witness/victim character).
3. Gateway (d) & Propensity: Section 103 & R v Hanson
Gateway (d) is the most frequently contested gateway in practice. Under Section 103(1) CJA 2003 , matters in issue between the defendant and prosecution include:
s.103(1)(a) : Whether the defendant has a propensity to commit offences of the kind charged; and
s.103(1)(b) : Whether the defendant has a propensity to be untruthful .
Propensity to Commit Offences (s.103(1)(a) & s.103(2)):
Under s.103(2) , a defendant's propensity to commit offences of the kind charged may be established by showing previous convictions for offences of the same description (defined by the same statutory offence formulation) or offences of the same category (categories specified by Secretary of State Order, e.g. Theft Act offences or Sexual Offences Act offences).
The Landmark R v Hanson Principles ([2005] EWCA Crim 191):
In R v Hanson , the Court of Appeal laid down binding guidance on establishing propensity under Gateway (d):
Three-Step Test for Propensity :
Step 1 : Does the history of convictions show a propensity to commit offences of the kind charged?
Step 2 : Does that propensity make it more likely that the defendant committed the offence charged?
Step 3 : Is it unjust to rely on the convictions, and would the admission of the evidence have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings that it ought to be excluded under Section 101(3)?
Single Conviction : A single previous conviction will rarely demonstrate a propensity unless it displays unusual or distinctive features matching the current offence.
Old Convictions : The older the conviction, the less probative value it possesses regarding current propensity.
Propensity to be Untruthful (s.103(1)(b)) : A previous conviction does not automatically show a propensity to be untruthful merely because the defendant pleaded not guilty in the past. Propensity to be untruthful requires convictions involving active deceit or perjury (e.g. fraud, forgery, perverting the course of justice) or where truthfulness is a specific issue in the case.
4. Statutory Fairness Exclusion & Judicial Discretion
The statutory framework balances prosecution admissibility with explicit defense protections:
Section 101(3) CJA 2003 (Mandatory Fairness Exclusion) : Applies specifically to applications made under Gateway (d) (matters in issue with prosecution) and Gateway (g) (attack on another person's character). The court must not admit evidence of bad character under these gateways if, on an application by the defendant, it appears to the court that the admission of the evidence would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings that the court ought not to admit it .
Section 78 PACE 1984 : The general judicial discretion to exclude unfair prosecution evidence applies across all bad character gateways.
Section 107 CJA 2003 (Duty to Stop Trial for Unreliable Bad Character Evidence) : If bad character evidence admitted under Gateways (c)–(g) is found during the trial to be contaminated (e.g., collusion between witnesses) or so unreliable that a conviction would be unsafe, the judge must direct an acquittal or discharge the jury.
5. Mandatory Judicial Directions to the Jury
Whenever defendant bad character evidence is admitted, the trial judge must give the jury precise, tailored directions in summing up ( R v Hanson ):
Purpose of Evidence : State clearly which gateway was used and the precise, limited purpose for which the bad character evidence is admitted (e.g. assessing propensity).
Prohibition on Prejudicial Reasoning : Expressly warn the jury that they must not convict the defendant purely or primarily because of his past record.
No Substitution for Proof : Warn the jury that bad character evidence cannot be used to bolster a weak prosecution case or substitute for proof of the essential elements ( actus reus and mens rea ) of the offence.