UKLawyers Archive of Crime and Punishment Materials - March 2006
Materials published by us on 30 March 2006
£2.5 Million for Victims of Rape and Domestic Violence
Home Office Press Release
29 March 2006
Victims of domestic and sexual violence will be better supported
thanks to £2.5 million in new funding announced today by
Baroness Scotland QC, Minister of State for Criminal Justice and
Offender Management, at the National Domestic Violence Conference.
The funding is part of the Government's ongoing work to reduce
gender-based violence and ensure the needs of victims are met at
every stage of the criminal justice process.
Manchester to Pilot Victims' Advocates
DCA Press Release
27 March 2006
Relatives of murder or manslaughter victims in Manchester will
have the opportunity to make a personal statement in court before
sentence, in trials where someone is charged with murder or
manslaughter after 24 April.
Cross-examination When Defendant Not Giving Evidence
Ebanks (Kurt) v The Queen [2006] UKPC 16
Provy Council
27 March 2006
Daily Law Notes Report Summary
It is the duty of defence counsel in a criminal case to put the
defendant's case, whether or not he intends to call evidence to
support it. If it is alleged that police officers have lied, there
can be no proper objection to cross-examination which successfully
exposes those lies, even if the defendant does not subsequently go
into the witness box to give positive evidence about those lies.
Life Sentence - Factors In Determining Minimum Sentence
In re Cadman's Application [2006] EWHC 586 (Admin)
QBD
23 March 2006
Daily Law Notes Report Summary
Materials published by us on 23 March 2006
Money Launderer - Confiscation Orders
Regina v Glatt [2006] EWCA Crim 605
CA
17 March 2006
Daily Law Notes Report Summary
When the court was imposing a confiscation order, s 74(4) of the
Criminal Justice Act 1988 Act did not apply to the assessment of
the value of benefit under s 71(4) of the same Act. Case about a
confiscation order imposed on 29 May 2002 in the sum of
3,676,508.50 GBP on a solicitor!
After Event Reports Cannot Usually Be Considered
on "Lenient Sentence" Appeal
Attorney General's Reference (No 19 of 2005)
R v B (WP)
CA
16 March 2006
Daily Law Notes Report Summary
Where the Attorney General sought to refer a sentence to the Court
of Appeal as unduly lenient, it was not open to that court to take
into account new material which had not been available to the
sentencing judge, provided that the conclusion that the judge had
reached was appropriate on the facts before him.
"Possession" of Inaccessible Computer Images
R v Porter
CA
16 March 2006
Daily Law Notes Report Summary
Where a person deleted images on his computer but they remained on
the computer's hard drive, he did not possess them for the
purposes of s 160(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 if he could
not retrieve or gain access to them.
Government Climb Down Over Abolishing Juries in Fraud Trials
Law Society Press Release
14 March 2006
The government has today announced that it will not be using
existing powers to remove juries in fraud trials in the face of
sustained criticism from the Law Society and other bodies. The
government has conceded that it does not have full parliamentary
support to use section 43 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 to
remove trial by jury in fraud cases. The Law Society believes the
availability of trial by jury in all serious criminal cases is a
fundamental right, vital to the rule of law.
Local Authority's Duty To House Arrested Youth
R (M) v Gateshead Metropolitan Borough Council
CA
14 March 2006
Daily Law Notes Report Summary
Any local authority which received a police request to provide
accommodation for an arrested juvenile was obliged under s
21(2)(b) of the Children Act 1989 to provide that accommodation
and the duty was not limited to a local authority in whose area
the child was located at the time of the request. The section did
not impose an absolute obligation to provide secure accommodation,
but simply accommodation.
Materials published by us on 16 March 2006
Tough Campaign to Tackle Rape
Home Office Press Release
14 March 2006
http://digbig.com/4gser
Home Office Minister Fiona Mactaggart today launched a
thought-provoking Government advertising campaign warning men that
they could go to jail for rape if they have sex without consent.
Appellant Who Attacked Judge Fails to Have Conviction Set Aside
Russell, R. v [2006] EWCA Crim 470
Ca
10 March 2006
BAILII Judgment
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2006/470.html
Defendant in attempted murder trial attacked judge as he was
summing up and tried to argue that this prevented a fair trial
before the same judge and jury. "It is self evident that no
defendant can obtain from actions such as this the termination of
his trial and a re-trial before a new tribunal. No fair minded
observer would conclude that continuing with the trial was unfair
or perceived to be unfair in such circumstances. There was
therefore no enquiry to be made of the jury; they were bound to
continue with the trial. They were properly directed to try the
case on the evidence they had heard and pay no regard to the
attempt to disrupt the trial. Indeed, as the judge correctly
observed, if a defendant was able to stop a trial and obtain a new
trial by acting in the way this appellant did, it would have the
potential of making trial by jury in this country unworkable."
Human Rights - Stop and Search - Terrorism
R (Gillan) v Comr of Police of the Metropolis and another;
R (Quinton) v Same [2006] UKHL 12
HL
8 March 2006
Daily Law Notes Report Summary
http://www.lawreports.co.uk/WLRD/2006/HLPC/mar0.6.htm
House of Lords Judgment
http://digbig.com/4gset
The powers to stop and search in ss 44 to 46 of the Terrorism Act
2000 were lawful in domestic law and not in breach of arts 5, 8,
10 or 11 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms.
Materials published by us on 9 March 2006
Striking Out As Abuse of Process Because of Delay
R v SCA
6 March 2006
Daily Law Notes Report Summary
Where an application was made to stay proceedings as an abuse of
process because of delay, the judge's discretionary decision
whether or not to grant the application was an exercise in
judicial assessment dependent on judgment rather than on any
conclusion as to fact based on evidence. To apply to the exercise
of that discretion the language of burden and standard of proof,
which was more apt to an evidence-based fact-finding process, was
therefore potentially misleading.
Aiding and Abetting Drunken Driver to Drive Dangerously
R v WebsterCA
3 March 2006
Daily Law Notes Report Summary
Where a defendant was charged with aiding and abetting another to
cause death by dangerous driving, it was not sufficient for the
prosecution merely to rely upon the intoxicated condition of the
driver rather than the manner of his driving. The condition of the
driver was relevant and admissible but did not determine whether
the way in which he drove was dangerous. The prosecution had to
prove that at the time that the defendant permitted the driver to
drive he foresaw that he was likely to drive in a dangerous
manner.