In England, who has the discretion to decide whether evidence should be excluded or admitted when certain conditions apply?

• A. The defendant
• B. The judge
• C. The Crown Prosecution Service
• D. The police

Answer: (B)

In England, the trial judge has the authority to decide whether evidence should be admitted or excluded, in order to keep the trial fair. This power comes from rules that govern admissibility, notably under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) and common-law fairness. The judge weighs whether admitting the evidence would be fair and reliable, and whether it was obtained lawfully. If admitting it would prejudice the fairness of the trial, mislead the jury, or render the proceedings unjust, the judge may exclude it. For example, evidence obtained through an unlawful search or a confession obtained in a coercive way can be excluded, and the judge can also direct the jury to disregard unreliable portions.

The other parties don’t have the final say on admissibility. The police collect evidence, and the Crown Prosecution Service decides what to rely on, but neither can unilaterally exclude or admit evidence during the trial—the judge makes that ruling. The defendant can request exclusion or argue for it, but the ultimate decision rests with the judge.