(b)     Merits – There was no evidence that the courts before which the applicant had contested the police report had had preconceived ideas as to her guilt, despite the fact the judgment of

by the police concerning the accident ended on 27 November 2008 with the prosecutor’s proposal not to commence the criminal pursuit against the van’s driver for the crime of manslaughter because no guilt

consult with his solicitor both in person and by telephone immediately prior to making the admission; (v)     while the applicant’s conviction had been based on a voluntary confession of his guilt

Germany [GC], found as follows: Firstly, it emerged from the decisions in question that the domestic courts had made an assessment of the applicants’ guilt referring to the statements of the witnesses

Germany [GC], found as follows: Firstly, it emerged from the decisions in question that the domestic courts had made an assessment of the applicants’ guilt referring to the statements of the witnesses

leur rapport, composée de : Madame Christine DA LUZ, présidente Madame Corinne JACQUEMIN LAGACHE, conseillère Madame Véronique BOST, conseillère Greffier, lors des débats : Madame Aude-Marie GUILCHER

on Articles 3, 6 and 14 (art. 3, art. 6, art. 14);   -     held unanimously that the Netherlands were to pay to      the applicant the sum of 18 989,62 Dutch guilders

these violations intended to punish him for his Crimean Tatars protection activities as a part of the Crimean Tatars persecutions, and that his detention intended to pressure him into acknowledging his guilt

On 2 March 2002 a prosecutor decided not to charge K. because under judgment of 30 January 2002 that murder had been committed by the applicant and his guilt had been sufficiently proven.

breaches of their right to a fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal established by law to determine, within a reasonable time, criminal charges against them, their right to have their guilt

There he was convicted of two counts of murder and aggravated robbery and sentenced to life imprisonment, after the trial court had ruled that his “guilt was of particular gravity”.

  Presumption of innocence Implementation of pre-emption measure not tantamount to declaration of guilt. Conclusion : no violation (unanimously). IV.

In particular, did the Supreme Court assess the applicant’s guilt, in whole or in part, by re-assessing the evidentiary value of testimony provided by the accused and witnesses before the District Court

violation of Article 5, paragraph 3 (art. 5-3), of the convention in respect of each applicant;   - held that the respondent State was to pay each applicant the sum of three hundred (300) Dutch Guilders

the light of specific criteria (such as an actual and concrete risk that the accused person might tamper with the evidence, commit a serious crime or escape, or serious indications of the accused's guilt

In July 1992 the Steyr Regional Court acquitted the applicant on the ground that his guilt could not be established. The applicant was released.

Mr Kharitonov’s guilt in committing the crime is proved by the entire set of evidence examined by the court ...

Finally, it could not be concluded that the applicant was given protection in the minor-offences proceedings, since they had been time-barred and had thus ended without a final decision on the attackers’ guilt