The appellant had been correctly convicted of using racially aggravated, abusive or insulting or words or behaviour with intent to cause fear or provoke violence under s.31(1)(a) Crime and Disorder Act 1998 when he called a group of Spanish women “bloody foreigners” and stated they should “go back to their own country.” The HL stated that the meaning of “racial group” in s.28(4) went beyond defining groups by their colour, race or ethnicity. The Statue provided for a flexible, non-technical appr ...
|
An application for disclosure under s.8 CPIA 1996 fell within one of the purposes for holding a preparatory hearing under s.7 CJA 1987. However, an appeal from the preparatory hearing under s.9(11) CJA 1987 would only lie if it involved a question of law. In the instant case the judge was asked to order disclosure, rather than make a ruling on a question of law. Therefore the could be no appeal against the decision under s.9(11) CJA 1987.
|
D failed to provide information to support travel documentation required for his deportation. In his defence, D claimed that his fear of returning to his country of origin was a reasonable excuse. Held: Such a fear was not a reasonable excuse so as to afford a defence to a charge under s.35(3) Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants etc) Act 2004. `
|
(1) Terrorist legislation applies to countries which are governed by tyrants and dictators. There is no exemption from criminal liability for terrorist activities which are motivated or said to be morally justified by the alleged nobility of the terrorist cause. (2) Only if the prosecution demonstrate that the activities and behaviour of D constituted the terrorist offences alleged against him, does the "reasonable excuse" issue arise. The s.58(3) defence is not available to achieve in effect ...
|
D pleaded guilty to an offence under s.47 OAPA 1861. Following a Newton hearing in the magistrates' court, D was committed to the Crown Court for sentence and invited the Judge to rehear the Newton hearing. The Judge was of the view that he did not have the power to do so (s.5 PCC(S)A 2000). The Judge consented to D's application to state a case as the law was unclear. Held: (1) There was no jurisdiction to state a case as the matter related to an interlocutory hearing. (2) It was appropriate i ...
|
S.152(2) and 153 CJA 2003 contained provisions that ought to have reduced prison numbers. At a time when prisons were overcrowded, Judges should bear these 2 provisions in mind when passing sentence. Unlike in the past, fines are now properly enforced so should be considered as an appropriate penalty. Custody would usually be inappropriate for first time offenders, especially if they were also young.
|
Under s.3 Sexual Offences Act 2003, a defence of self-induced intoxication could not succeed in order to negative an intent to touch another person.
|
(1) Issues relating to time on remand should be dealt with during the sentence hearing. (2) If the Judge required more information, that part of the sentencing hearing could be adjourned. Ordinarily the adjournment should be no longer than 28 days, but it could be if required. An adjournment beyond 28 days did not offend s.155 PCC(S)A 2000 as corrections to remedy administrative errors can be made outside of the 28 day period (applying R v Annesley [1976] 1 WLR 106)
|
A compact disc or computer hard drive were capable of being termed 'articles', as per s.57 Terrorism Act (TA) 2000. However, s.57 should not be used to circumvent s.58 TA 2000 as Parliament had prescribed different rules for documents and records (s.58) and articles (s.57).
|
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence- Knowledge of Possession
On 7 October 2005 at Glasgow Sheriff Court the appellant was found guilty as libelled by a majority verdict on four charges relating to contraventions of the Firearms Act 1968. In the livingroom of the appellant's flat a rucksack was lying on the floor next to a chair which was next to the television set. A police officer asked the appellant if the rucksack was his to which he replied "Aye - oh, I don't know." The rucksack was found to contain a number of incriminating items. The grounds of appe ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... |