There was no support for the proposition that the Criminal Justice (Evidence) (Northern Ireland) Order 2004 had changed the law by prohibiting bad character evidence on its own from constituting, in appropriate circumstances, evidence of identity.
ADMISSIBILITY BAD CHARACTER CHILD SEX OFFENCES CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE (EVIDENCE) (NORTHERN IRELAND) ORDER 2004 IDENTITY MURDER NORTHERN IRELAND PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE ON ITS OWN TO ESTABLISH IDENTITY
Where a defendant, charged with committing sexual offences against his stepdaughters, had attacked the character of one of the victims, the judge had been entitled to allow the prosecution to admit evidence of the defendant’s previous convictions for non-sexual offences in accordance with the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.101(1)(g).
ADMISSIBILITY ADMISSIBILITY OF DEFENDANT’S PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS UNDER S.101(1)(G) CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 ATTACKS ON CHARACTER ATTACKS ON CHARACTER OF VICTIM BAD CHARACTER CHILD SEX OFFENCES CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.101(1)(g) JURY DIRECTIONS PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS PROPENSITY s.101 s.103
Once a judge had decided that a defendant should be treated as being of good character, the judge was required as a matter of law to give the full good character direction and there was no room for a jury to disagree as to the propriety of using the defendant’s good character in his favour.
CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE DEFENDANT WITH SPENT CONVICTIONS ENTITLEMENT TO FULL GOOD CHARACTER DIRECTION GOOD CHARACTER JURY DIRECTIONS PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS SEXUAL OFFENCES SPENT CONVICTIONS
A sentence of imprisonment for public protection following an offender’s conviction for making indecent photographs of children was unreasonable where on the facts there was no significant risk of his causing serious harm to others. A sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment was substituted.
CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.225 IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN JUSTIFICATION FOR SENTENCE OF IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION OBSCENITY PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS RISK OF REOFFENDING s.224(3) s.229(3) SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING
Where a judge had given a direction to the jury that it was not to convict the defendant only on the basis of his similar previous conviction and, looking at the matter overall, the judge had properly admitted evidence of the previous conviction under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.101(1)(g).
ADMISSIBILITY ADMISSION OF EVIDENCE OF PREVIOUS CONVICTION UNDER S.101(1)(G) CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 APPROPRIATENESS OF ADMISSION IN LIGHT OF RELEVANT JURY DIRECTION CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.101(1)(d) CRIMINAL PROCEDURE GUILTY PLEAS JURY DIRECTIONS PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS s.101(1)(g) s.101(3) s.101(4) s.103 SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 2003
A judge had been correct to admit a defendant’s previous convictions as bad character under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.101(1)(d), despite their being over 30 years old, since they had relevant factual similarities to the offence charged and were of sufficient probative force.
ADMISSIBILITY ADMISSIBILITY OF OLD CONVICTIONS FOR OFFENCES SIMILAR TO OFFENCE CHARGED BAD CHARACTER CHILD SEX OFFENCES CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.101(1)(d) EVIDENCE AS TO PROPENSITY PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS PROPENSITY s.101 s.103(1)(a) s.103(2) s.103(3) s.225 s.229 SEXUAL ASSAULT SPENT CONVICTIONS
A judge had been correct to admit a defendant’s previous bad character under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.101(1)(g) since the conduct of that defendant in his evidence-in-chief amounted to an attack on prosecution witnesses. However, a sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment had been manifestly excessive for breach of a sexual offences prevention order.
ADMISSIBILITY APPLICATION OF S.101(1)(G) CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 BAD CHARACTER BREACH BREACH OF SEXUAL OFFENCES PREVENTION ORDER CONDUCT DURING EVIDENCE-IN-CHIEF CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.101(1)(g) PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS PROPENSITY s.101(1)(d) s.103(1)(b) Sch.15 SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES PREVENTION ORDERS
The judge had been wrong to admit documents, prepared by police officers, giving details of methods used in the commission of offences of which the appellant had been previously convicted, but the appellant’s convictions for the instant offences were nevertheless safe. It was important that the formal procedures referred to in R. v Hanson (Nicky) (2005) EWCA Crim 824 , (2005) 1 W.L.R. 3169 were followed.
ADMISSIBILITY ADMISSIBILITY OF INFORMATION ABOUT OFFENCES RETRIEVED FROM POLICE COMPUTER SYSTEM AGREEMENTS AS TO RELEVANT CIRCUMSTANCES OF PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS CASE MANAGEMENT COMPLAINANTS CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.117 CRIMINAL LAW METHODS USED POLICE AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1984 POLICE AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1984 s.73 PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS PROPENSITY RELEVANT SEXUAL OFFENCES REQUIREMENT FOR STATEMENT BY PREVIOUS COMPLAINANT OF SEXUAL OFFENCE s.101 s.101(1)(d) s.101(d) s.103 s.103(1) s.103(1)(a) s.114(1) s.116(2) S.116(2) CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 S.117 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.117(1) s.117(1)(a) s.2(b) SEXUAL ASSAULTS SEXUAL OFFENCES VICTIMS WITNESS STATEMENTS
A sentence of 8 years’ imprisonment was the correct starting point for an offence of rape where there were aggravating features of the use of a knife, a degree of planning, a persistence of attack and previous convictions.
AGGRAVATING FEATURES DISCOUNT FOR MITIGATION KNIVES KNIVES~RAPE OF WOMAN AT KNIFEPOINT IN DARK ALLEYWAY~UNDUE LENIENCY MITIGATION PERSISTENCY OF ATTACKS PLANNING PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS RAPE RAPE IN ALLEY SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES STARTING POINT FOR SENTENCING UNDUE LENIENCY USE OF KNIVES
The appellant’s convictions for indecent assaults against young girls over 30 years ago were safe. His sentence would be reduced from seven years to four and a half years as these were not the most serious offences of their kind.
ADMISSIBILITY ALIBI DIRECTION ALIBIS APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE APPROPRIATE SENTENCE LENGTH CHARACTER DIRECTION CIVIL EVIDENCE COLLUSION OF WITNESSES CREDIBILITY CRIMINAL APPEALS CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 1988 s.23 CRIMINAL LAW DELAY DELAY BETWEEN OFFENCES AND TRIAL FAILURE TO GIVE ALIBI DIRECTION HEARSAY HEARSAY EVIDENCE INDECENT ASSAULT INDECENT ASSAULTS AGAINST CHILDREN JUDGE’S DIRECTIONS JURY DIRECTIONS LEAVE TO ADDUCE HEARSAY EVIDENCE REFUSED PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS PROPENSITY SELECTIVE INTRODUCTION SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES TIME WITNESS STATEMENTS
Please use the form below to make contact. Your email will be responded to promptly (we endeavour to respond to all email enquiries within one hour). Alternatively, you can call Stephen's firm, Twelve Tabulae Limited, on +44 (0) 203 846 5801.