Defending Rob Titchner - 06/05/16

This week Kirstin's going through s.76 Serious Crime Act 2015.  It deals with coercive control - or domestic violence that's not that physical.  We use the scandalous plot of "The Archers" to briefly explain what can make up the background to these new cases.

Take a listen right here.

Then we go through the section to look at who can and can't be guilty of the offence and where the problems might lie in making it stick where there are no other offences.  Is this just a way of getting 5 years for common assault?

We go on to look at the practicalities involved for a trial - problems the prosecution will face and the holes that might be worth poking at if you're defending.


Let us know if you like the new "Bites" format (shorter and with less wine and cake) or if you are longing for a return to our longer format. If you are a law student, we'd be really grateful if you would spread the news of our show's return around your law school friends. Also, get in touch. We'd love to hear from you.

PLEASE RATE/REVIEW US: wherever you subscribe, please take two seconds as we start this series, to give us some stars and a few kind words.  We'd be e'er so obliged.  It helps us get up the search rankings, ya see.  If you use iTunes, please click here and it'll take just seconds!

S13E03 - Expert Evidence, Unreliable Evidence and Fresh Evidence

Listen to this week's show right here.

We have talked about expert witnesses many times over the past 12 series but we have seldom explored exactly what an "expert witness" is, what they do, to whom they are accountable, how they are regulated and how they come to be involved in cases.  

This week, we fix that by catching-up with Glen Siddall of Aequitas Forensics, Manchester.  Glen is an expert in digital forensics and he is instructed by "both sides" in criminal proceedings.  We ask him about his work and about recent changes in the world of the expert witness and about hacking Richard Bacon's iPhone.

We also talk to Glen about the recent BBC documentary, Panorama - Justice For Sale?  Did the programme accurately reflect his experience of being an expert and does he agree with the conclusions of the journalist and of Timothy Dutton QC, former Chair of the Bar about future regulation?

In the news this week, fresh evidence appeals.  We record on the day after a man walks free after being wrongly-convicted of raping his wife multiple times.  Fresh evidence emerged that the complainant (who still cannot be named) had lied about the rape, had talked about lying in advance of the trial and seemingly boasted about lying after the event.  This is the nightmare scenario that, whilst certainly rare, we would prefer to think never happens.  He had been sentenced to 9 years for each count but this was increased to 13 years by the Court of Appeal, following an Attorney-General's Reference.

With that and other matters in our minds, we look at what the Court of Appeal has recently said about fresh evidence and we'll consider whether its approach is consistent.

A little bit of Freedom of Information too, this week.  We heard that the CPS was using unpaid students to prepare cases in one of its offices.  We asked if this could possibly be true.  They answered our FOI request.  Is the answer surprising or not?


PLEASE RATE/REVIEW US: wherever you subscribe, please take two seconds as we start this series, to give us some stars and a few kind words.  We'd be e'er so obliged.  It helps us get up the search rankings, ya see.  If you use iTunes, please click here and it'll take just seconds! Feeding BritCaster.com

S13E02 - Historic Sexual Offences

Have a listen to this week's show right here.

In the light of the recent verdicts and sentence in Rolph Harris' case, Kirstin goes through the Sexual Offences Act 1956, looking at what offences are contained in it and how amendments have affected the law.
Given that we are on the subject of how the law changes over the years and that retrospective legislation is dangerous territory, we thought it would be worthwhile to take a peek at the decision of the High Court in Reilly (No.2) as the Government gets a bloody nose for playing dirty with JSA claimants.

Both hefty legal matters this week so next week we will hopefully be being chatty on the subject of experts and looking at our postbag from the CPS, MoJ and Home Office.  Doesn't look like fan mail....

Also, PLEASE RATE/REVIEW US: wherever you subscribe, please take two seconds as we start this series, to give us some stars and a few kind words.  We'd be e'er so obliged.  It helps us get up the search rankings, ya see.

S13E01 - Let's Look At That Again

We are back for Series 13 (!) of the podcast and we are raring to go with some law this week.  Many thanks to the good folks at UK Criminal Law Blog Podcast and thanks again to Lyndon Harris for having both Kirstin and Ben on this series.  

As always, you can hear this week's show by clicking here.

Also, PLEASE RATE/REVIEW US: wherever you subscribe, please take two seconds as we start this series, to give us some stars and a few kind words.  We'd be e'er so obliged.  It helps us get up the search rankings, ya see.

And now, on with the show notes:

When can the Attorney-General have the CA review a sentence?

We often talk of defence appeals but if the AG thinks that a sentence is passed he can refer it to the CA (with leave) but only in some cases.  

What are they? - The Criminal Justice Act 1988 (Reviews of Sentencing) Order 2006 amending Part IV of the CJA 1988.  

Recent addition? - CJA 1988 (Reviews of Sentencing)(Amendments) Order 2014 {IN FORCE 21st July but laid before Parliament today}

Thoughts on why we have that system? Is it only sentences or can the Crown have another pop at conviction when they fail the first time?

Why only certain offences?

Searching questions

Sweeney -v- Westminster Magistrates’ Court and London Regional Asset Recovery Team and Environment Agency 2014 EWHC 2068

Experts and their duties

The BBC’s Panorama recently covered the behaviour of expert witnesses to criminal proceedings.