Google+

Friday, 23 August 2013

S09E05 - A Conventional Episode

Two conventions this week - the Hague and the Refugee.  You can listen here.

Jonathan Holt and Dan Bunting discuss s.31 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 which gives special criminal defences to asylum seekers.

You can follow Dan and his musings at Dan Bunting a life in the bus lane.  uk criminal law blog and of course, on the Twitter @danbunting.

The case that sparked the discussion is here

Then we go on to discuss In the Matter of an application by Her Majesty's Solicitor General for the committal to prison of Jennifer Marie Jones for alleged contempt of court.  A case which highlights the need for precision when drafting an order with a penal notice. 


It considers whether you commit a breach if you fail to do something after the time you ought to have done it, why you need to tell someone to do something by four days after you want it doing and revisits who can bring contempt proceedings.  It's a very good place to start if you ever need to research contempt!


Cake and Bourbon Show next week - don't miss it!

Friday, 16 August 2013

S09E04 - Sticky Fingers

Listen here!

This week Ben,Kirstin and Jonathan are joined by the lovely Lyndon Harris, barrister, blogger and Banks on Sentencing editor.

Our discussion is all about imaginative approaches to theft offences.  First we look at Professor Andrew Ashworth's Howard League paper which suggests that Theft should not incur a prison sentence, then Lyndon gives broad support to the idea of giving shop-lifters food vouchers.  Jonathan Holt considers proposals for making Magistrates impose more custodial sentences and worries about the demise of more and more
Magistrates' courts in which to issue those sentences.

Finally we turn away from Criminal Law and look at two Immigration Law cases implimenting the ruling in Zambrano.

Update on the so-called “sexual predator” case
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/12/paedophile-victim-predatory-sentence-increased

No Prison for Pilferers
http://www.howardleague.org/what-if-property-offences/

Stoke reward shoplifters with food vouchers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-23654802

Magistrates to get a power-up - but where will they use it?
http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/government-propose-new-custodial-powers-magistrates#comment-35244
http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/doubts-over-moj-s-savings-target

MA and SM (Zambrano: EU children outside EU) Iran [2013] UKUT 00380 (IAC)

Friday, 9 August 2013

S09E03 - Mind Your Language?


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

Friday, 2 August 2013

S09E02 Causation, Contempt, Confiscation

You can listen to the episode here.  Note there is some swearing in this episode.
This week we let Jonathan Holt out of the dungeon and we discuss a host of case law.

First up is the current news favourite AG v Davey and AG v Beard 2 jurors found guilty of contempt of court via Facebook and internet research.

Then we look at who can and cannot bring committal proceedings against those in breach of Forced Marriage Prevention Orders with a recent High Court Case.

Ben runs us through some confiscation cases R v Sale and R v Morgan at whirlwind speed.

And finally Kirstin tells us about the recent Supreme Court Case R v Hughes.

If you want to look at the new practice guidence in regard to in private committals for contempt of court you can find them here and the supplement here.


 

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Contact our Support

Email us:

mail@northpod.co.uk