Which case established the right to silence in relation to drawing unfavorable inferences?

The case that established the right to silence in relation to drawing unfavorable inferences is R v FE. This landmark decision affirmed the principle that individuals have the right to remain silent during police questioning and that they should not face negative repercussions for exercising this right. The ruling clarified that a failure to answer questions cannot automatically be used against a person in a court of law to suggest guilt or to interpret their silence as an admission of wrongdoing.

In this case, the court emphasized that the right to silence is a fundamental legal principle designed to protect individuals against self-incrimination. It acknowledges the balance between the accused's right to defend themselves and the prosecution's interest in gathering evidence.

Other cases might deal with relevant issues surrounding rights during police interrogations or the admissibility of confessions, but they do not specifically address the drawing of unfavorable inferences as clearly and definitively as R v FE does. Thus, this case is pivotal in establishing how silence should be treated within the criminal justice system.