The court found the applicant guilty and sentenced him to 20 years imprisonment. His two co-accused were found guilty as well. They all appealed.   18.

Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.” 17.

The applicant acknowledged her guilt in respect of the crimes. From 17 to 18 November 2004 the applicant was detained in the Lubny temporary detention facility.

The lawyer submitted that the applicant was not guilty and asked that the proceedings be discontinued.

“had been guilty of committing [four criminal offences]”, and the appellate court had not made good of the violation. 6.

In a judgment of 10 February 2005 the Hradec Králové Regional Court ( krajský soud ) found the applicant guilty of an attempted murder.

  266-A), it held that it was not the refusal of a claim for compensation which was contrary to the Convention, but the re-examination of the question of guilt after a final acquittal.

The Court of Appeal rightly considered [T.’s] confession statement as reliable and regarded it as proof of [the applicant’s] guilt.

When an agreement is reached regarding responsibility, the accused pleads guilty and/or cooperates with the investigation. 4.

    Following her admission, she was charged before the criminal courts and on 18 September 2014 she was found guilty of perjury.

of having committed an offence before that guilt is established by a court (see, Allenet de Ribemont v.

On 16   October 2001 the Regional Court found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to seventeen years’ imprisonment.

Article 6 § 2 prohibits, inter alia , statements made by public officials about pending criminal investigations which encourage the public to believe the suspect guilty and prejudge the assessment of the

  On the merits, on 30 June 2004, the Orléans Criminal Court found Mr Chesne guilty of unauthorised purchase of drugs as a repeat offender and sentenced him to 13 years’ imprisonment.

However, on searching him the officers found a large sum in Dutch guilders, which they confiscated.

Although the impugned statement had been made after the first-instance court had found the applicant guilty, it had been clear that the principle of presumption of innocence had still applied.

But although they cannot of themselves, those failures, prove guilt, you may hold that failure against them in deciding whether he is guilty. You don’t have to. It is for you to decide.

before he has been proved guilty according to law (see, inter alia , Allenet de Ribemont v.

On 23 August 1994 the Tsentralniy District Court of Omsk found the applicant guilty of theft and sentenced him to two years’ imprisonment.

It held that the first-instance court had not examined his guilt in respect of the murders.