Question 1 of 10

You represent Maxine who is facing trial for an offence of attempted theft of a motor vehicle. The Crowns case is that a witness saw someone who resembles Maxine at approximately 1am trying to force open the door of a car on the street. The person appeared to have an object in her hand which she was using to prise open the door. On being disturbed, the person walked away. The witness called the police who arrived within a few minutes and noted that there was damage to the door consistent with a metal object being used in an attempt to prise it open. The officer carried out a search of the area, looking for someone who fitted the description provided by the witness.The officer came across Maxine a short distance away. Upon searching her he found a screwdriver in her pocket. She was arrested and interviewed at the police station shortly afterwards. During the interview she refused to provide an explanation for her possession of the screwdriver.The prosecutor tells you that he intends to submit that an adverse inference should be drawn under s.36 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 due to her failure to provide an explanation for her possession of the screwdriver.Can an adverse inference be drawn under s.36 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 in these circumstances?

A. A B. An inference may be drawn because of Maxines failure to account for possession of the item, whether or not she was under arrest at the time the request was made. C. B D. No inference may be drawn as long as Maxine gives an explanation for possession of the item in evidence at trial E. C F. No inference may be drawn unless, prior to requesting an explanation, a constable had informed Maxine in ordinary language of the consequences of failing to provide an explanation G. D H. No inference may be drawn unless Maxine gives evidence at trial and provides an explanation that she could reasonably have been expected to provide at the time