Användning och värdering av karaktärsbevis

The principle of free presentation and evaluation of evidence is the most fundamental principle in Swedish evidence law. Consequently, there are no general prohibitions against so called character evidence. Despite this, character evidence is a frequent object of discussion in evidence law literature. The purpose of this thesis is to examine the admissibility and value of character evidence in Swedish law, both through a descriptive study and a normative discussion. All evidence can be divided into two categories: trace evidence and predictive evidence. Character evidence belongs to the latter. Character evidence can consist either of evidence of criminal character or evidence of non-criminal character. The first type of evidence is attributed to criminal record while the second is concerned with other reprehensible character traits. The thesis describes how character evidence can be used to influence the credibility assessment and the question of guilt. The study presents relevant case law that concern the two types of character evidence and the various ways to use them. Character evidence is admitted in every case but the general consensus seems to be that such evidence is of low value. Furthermore, the thesis contains an international view where the English, American and international stance on character evidence is presented. In common law systems, the use of character evidence is regulated by law but despite the restrictive rules there are some exceptions where character evidence may be admissible. In international criminal law character evidence is mostly seen as irrelevant and in any case of low value. Psychological research forms the foundation for using character as evidence since it is based on theories on character traits and their stability over time. The thesis provides an overview of some research on the area. There are indications that character evidence should be assigned low value due to the so called attribution error, where character traits are over-emphasised and situational explanations are under-emphasised when assessing the behaviour of people. At the end of the thesis various arguments that have been presented in evidence law literature are raised, e.g. the problem of incitement, the criminal record paradox, the reference class problem and a feminist perspective. These arguments approach the topic of character evidence from different angles. The analysis provides a conclusion on the admissibility and value of character evidence in Swedish law. Additionally, there is a discussion about the consequences of using character evidence and what value it should be assigned. My conclusion is that character evidence shall be admissible since the positive consequences outweigh the negative. However, the value of character evidence must be low since there are risks of uncertainty in the evaluation of the evidence.