2.4 Exclusion of Admissible Evidence
Confessions, the general discretion to exclude evidence and the treatment of entrapment.
Prepare for legal understanding and application
Use the exact 2026 syllabus, distinguish neighbouring offences and powers, apply facts to elements and safeguards, and monitor College channels for any exceptional formal update.
Core concepts
Concept 1
2.4 Exclusion of Admissible Evidence: syllabus scope: Confessions, the general discretion to exclude evidence and the treatment of entrapment.
Exam cue: Locate the exact inspectors' Appendix A chapter before selecting the governing rule.
Concept 2
Confessions: Identify oppression, unreliability and the burden and consequence attached to the confession rule.
Exam cue: Separate offence elements or power thresholds from safeguards, defences, procedure and consequence.
Concept 3
General exclusion: Separate confession-specific exclusion from the broader fairness discretion.
Exam cue: Apply the stated facts to neighbouring rules instead of answering from the seriousness of the outcome alone.
Concept 4
Entrapment: Analyse state conduct and abuse-of-process consequences without treating entrapment as a free-standing substantive defence.
Risk pitfalls and guardrails
Using chapter 1.8, which the 2026 handbook reserves for the sergeants' examination.
Guardrail: Use a 15-second safety pause before finalizing your action.
Treating a post-examination subject-area breakdown as a fixed prediction of the next paper.
Guardrail: Use a 15-second safety pause before finalizing your action.
Collapsing distinct rules within Exclusion of Admissible Evidence into one undifferentiated test.
Guardrail: Use a 15-second safety pause before finalizing your action.
Memory anchors
2.4 Exclusion of Admissible Evidence: syllabus scope
Confessions, the general discretion to exclude evidence and the treatment of entrapment.
Confessions
Identify oppression, unreliability and the burden and consequence attached to the confession rule.
General exclusion
Separate confession-specific exclusion from the broader fairness discretion.
Entrapment
Analyse state conduct and abuse-of-process consequences without treating entrapment as a free-standing substantive defence.
2.4 Exclusion of Admissible Evidence: examination boundary
Use the rule and procedure stated in the prescribed 2026 manual and any expressly notified College update; do not silently substitute an earlier edition or later live-law change.
Checkpoint rule
Do the check-up only after you can summarize each concept in one sentence and identify one dangerous pitfall from memory.
Knowledge Check (after reading)
Short check-up to confirm understanding of this module.
Check-up Questions
A confession was obtained by oppression by a person in authority. What does section 76 PACE require if the issue is raised?
A confession may have been rendered unreliable by what officers said or did. What is the section 76 question?
Who bears the burden once a section 76 oppression or unreliability issue is properly raised?
Evidence was obtained through a serious PACE breach, and admission would adversely affect fairness. Which power should the court consider?
The prosecution offers highly prejudicial defence-obtained evidence. Does section 78 PACE provide the usual exclusion route?
Answer all questions to submit.
Next step personalized recommendations
Continue learning
Move forward only after this module is stable.
What is Pass Harbor?
Completely free exam prep for 247 UK exams.
- Practice questions
- Flashcards
- Study guides
- Mock exams
- No registration
- No paywall
- Start instantly
“No more expensive exam prep. Quality study tools should be accessible to everyone.”