If the object was to contest the City Court's assessment of evidence in relation to the question of guilt (bevisbedømmelsen under skyldspørsmålet, Article 369, as applicable at the relevant time), the

Only two conclusions are possible in a criminal case – guilt or acquittal (see Articles 365, 366, 372 and 373 of the Code of Criminal Procedure).

However, the Court has held that where an appellate court is called upon to examine a case as to the facts and the law and to make a full assessment of the question of the applicant’s guilt or innocence

    The court concluded that in the light of the evidence seen as a whole, the applicant's guilt was not open to doubt. 28.

It followed that the sole fact that the applicant had made a statement, including both admissions of guilt and denials, in the absence of a lawyer could not ipso facto entail a violation of Article 6 of

  The only sentence      appropriate to the crime and to the accused's guilt is thus life      imprisonment."   58.

In doing so, the Regional Court stated, in particular, the following: “The Court, taking into account and having assessed the evidence supporting the accusation, finds that [the applicant’s] guilt in the

However, the Strasbourg jurisprudence had divorced the word “innocent” from its context and “blurred the crucial distinction between guilt for the purposes of the criminal law and guilt for other purposes

After examining the applicants’ claims in the light of the available evidence, the court held that the lower courts had correctly established the applicants’   guilt.

  It had to make a full assessment of the question of guilt or innocence and was not in doing so limited in its competence in any way.

During the questioning the applicant confessed his guilt. 10.

He reiterated that the domestic courts had failed to provide any items of evidence concerning his guilt and to provide reasons for their decisions. 34.

    The applicant was committed to stand trial in the Ajarian High Court, where he denied all guilt. He maintained that this second prosecution was the result of a conspiracy to frame him.

    The Court of Appeal assessed the evidence differently, based on the material in the case file, and found that the applicant’s guilt was established.

He then described his confession as “the only way to accept his deep guilt” and as the “greatest possible apology for the murder of the child”. 29.

    At the hearing on 27 September 2010 the applicant denied her guilt, claiming that she had only confessed to the murder in the pre-trial stage of the proceedings out of fear.

In the event of any finding of guilt, the Court hears mitigation and then retires (this time with the Judge Advocate present to advise them) to consider their sentence. ...” 53.

Article 4 does not       alter the fundamental principle that the burden rests on       the Crown to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Having heard the evidence and the parties’ submissions on the question of the applicant’s guilt, the tribunal withdrew for deliberations. After the deliberations, the President announced the verdict.