Improperly Obtained Evidence in Anglo-American and Continental Law

Prof Giannoulopoulos’ book offers an extensive cosmopolitan, cross-cultural insight into the perennial controversy over the use of improperly obtained evidence in criminal trials. In his presentation, Prof Giannoulopoulos will concentrate on the applications of the ‘rights thesis’ (the idea of excluding evidence to protect constitutional or human rights) to contemporary debates on improperly obtained evidence. This seminal, rights-centred, approach to excluding improperly obtained evidence was originally developed by Oxford’s Vinerian Professor of English Law (from 1997 to 2013), and now Emeritus Professor, Andrew Ashworth, over forty years ago. Prof Giannoulopoulos’ book develops a defence of, and attempts to reinvigorate, Prof Ashworth’s thesis, arguing that there is significant scope for Anglo–American and Continental legal systems to place a renewed emphasis on it, particularly in relation to confessional evidence obtained in violation of custodial interrogation rights; this is principally because we can locate an emerging rapprochement, and unique potential for European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence to build consensus, in this respect. In marked contrast, remaining divergence with regard to evidence obtained by privacy violations means there is little momentum to adopt a reinvigorated rights thesis more widely.