skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 78798 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: History of the Common Law of Criminal Procedure, 1166-1222
Author(s): W S Moss
Date Published: Unknown
Page Count: 187
Sponsoring Agency: US Dept of Justice
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 79-NI-AX-0025
Type: Thesis/Dissertation
Format: Dissertation/Thesis
Language: English
Country: United Kingdom
Annotation: Based on an analysis of the extant plea rolls of criminal cases heard in the royal courts in England in the period 1166-1222; English statutes, documents, treatises, and other legal literature from the 12th and 13th centuries; and scholarly works, this thesis attempts to reconstruct the common law of criminal procedure in its earliest stages and to explain how it worked.
Abstract: The primary issue in a criminal prosecution in the period 1166-1222 concerned whether and what kind of proof should be assigned to the defendant. The bona fide suspicion of the community established the prima facie case for an indictment, and its mode of trial was the ordeal by water. However, what constituted a prima facie case and what proofs the defendant might be subjected to depended upon the jurisdiction selected. Many victims sought to bring claims in the royal as opposed to shire or seignorial courts because the royal courts' common law standards for establishing a prima facie case worth testing by battle or the ordeal were less demanding than the procedures of less jurisdictions. It is clear from an examination of the cases that the justices who administered the common law of crime were rational men, who were concerned that the defendant be sent to proof only upon a bona fide, well-substantiated accusation. Numerous cases are discussed, and chapter notes are supplied. (Author abstract modified)
Index Term(s): Common law; Criminal proceedings; England; Evidence; Indictment; Jurisdiction
Note: Cambridge University - doctoral dissertation.
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.