This week's show (listen here) is brought to you courtesy of predatory comments made at Snaresbrook Crown Court and via Blackstones Criminal Law July Updater.
Ben talks to Kate Hammond, former CPS Crown Advocate and to Keith Jones, both Barristers in Private Practice at Central Chambers in Manchester. They discuss the recent and much publicised use of the term "sexual predator" by Prosecuting Counsel, in relation to a 13-year-old victim.
Kirstin joins Ben then to go through some interesting cases with differing bizarreness rating. We answer the questions:
1. Whether it matters if you thought you were indulging in sex with a girl or a boy- R v McNally
2. Whether you can do an act which intimidates without intimidating - R v ZN
3. What is the exact time the Defence are aware of a witness for the purpose of witness notification?
- Re Joseph Hill and Co
4. Whether the Jury need to know for what a SOPO was imposed. - Sheikh [2013] EWCA Crim 907
and
5. When is the prosecution allowed to rely on their witness being a good egg? - R v Lodge
If you'd like to view the vulnerable witness handling video please click here.
And if you're following the 13-year-old case controversy and have run out of reading matter you might find some new stuff in this lot:
News articles:
CPS guidance:
Pressure Group against “ostensible consent” as a concept: http://yhndm.co.uk/Main/why-children-can-t-consent.html
0 comments:
Post a Comment