<Li> Until relatively recently, it was common for the justice system to have suspects tortured to extract confessions from them, since circumstantial evidence was rarely analyzed or admitted in those times . Although in the west this practice has generally been disallowed in the more recent past, except during 20th - century fascist governments, there have been attempts to introduce evidence obtained from suspects tortured elsewhere . </Li> <Li> In the United Kingdom changes have been made affecting this principle . Defendants' previous convictions may in certain circumstances be revealed to juries . Although the suspect is not compelled to answer questions after formal arrest, failure to give information may now be prejudicial at trial . Statute law also exists which provides for criminal penalties for failing to decrypt data on request from the Police . If the suspect is unwilling to do so, it is an offence . Citizens can therefore be convicted and imprisoned without any evidence that the encrypted material was unlawful . Furthermore, in sexual offence cases such as rape, where the sexual act has already been proved beyond reasonable doubt, there are a limited number of circumstances where the defendant has an obligation to adduce evidence that the complainant consented to the sexual act, or that the defendant reasonably believed that the complainant was consenting . These circumstances include, for example, where the complainant was unconscious, unlawfully detained, or subjected to violence . </Li> <Li> Scottish law provides for a third verdict: "not proven ." </Li> <Li> In some jurisdictions, state - funded defences may not match the quality of state - funded prosecutions . Further, where a defendant funds his or her own defence, the cost is borne solely by the individual, whereas the burden of funding a prosecution is collectively borne by the state . Individual defence resources in finances, information, equipment, expertise, research, and personnel may not match the resources of a government, especially if the defendant is imprisoned . </Li>

Where does the following basic human right find its origin innocent until proven guilty