![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |||||||||
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions |
||||||||||
PLEASE SUPPORT BAILII & FREE ACCESS TO LAW
To maintain its current level of service, BAILII urgently needs the support of its users.
Since you use the site, please consider making a donation to celebrate BAILII's 25 years of providing free access to law. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing this vital service.
Thank you for your support! | ||||||||||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions >> IA & Ors, R. v [2013] EWCA Crim 1308 (25 July 2013) URL: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2013/1308.html Cite as: [2013] EWCA Crim 1308 |
[New search]
[Context]
[View without highlighting]
[Printable RTF version]
[Help]
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() | ||
201205110 C1 201205168 C1 |
CRIMINAL
DIVISION)
ON APPEAL FROM Manchester Crown Court
HHJ Lakin
T20097724
201205168 C1 ![]() ![]() Strand, London, WC2A 2LL |
||
![]() |
B e f o r
e :
MR JUSTICE MACDUFF
and
MR JUSTICE DINGEMANS
____________________
![]() | ||
- and - |
||
![]() TA FA |
____________________
Registrar
of Appeals) for
IA
C Wade (instructed by
Registrar
of Appeals ) for TA
S Robinson
(instructed by
Registrar
of Appeals) for FA
P Cadwallader (instructed by Crown Prosecution Service) for the Respondent
Hearing dates : 11-12th July
2013
____________________
VERSION
OF JUDGMENT
Crown Copyright ©
Lord Justice Treacy:
Background
Did the applicants actively participate in arranging or facilitating RB's
arrival into the UK? And, if so, did the applicant intend that
RB
would be exploited by being forced to work?
Grounds of Appeal
(A) - The role
of Mr Flynn, the intermediary
"I felt a lot of the questions like previous last time (sic) were more directed at me than at [RB],
and I think that that was a way of undermining me and it did affect the way I work."
(B) – The judge's refusal
to exclude
RB's
evidence at the close of the prosecution case
"The main thrust of these points is consistency and suggestibility which I have dealt with above. The whole process of pre-interviewvisits
to
RB
is entirely transparent because the police kept detailed notes. In my judgment those meetings did not in any way amount to, or even come close to amounting to, witness training or coaching. What is left are jury points nothing more."
"Could areasonable
jury properly directed be sure that the witness has given a credible and accurate account on the
videotape,
notwithstanding any breaches?"
(C) – RB's
competence
"(1) At every stage incriminal
proceedings all persons are (whatever their age) competent to give evidence….
(3) A person is not competent to give evidence incriminal
proceedings if it appears to the court that he is not a person who is able to – (a) understand questions put to him as a witness, and (b) give answers to them which can be understood."
"In terms of her participation in proceedings, I do not find that she lacks capacity generally, although the court would be aware that, when under examination and cross examination, herresponses
to questioning maybe unclear. This is in contrast to her ability to give a free narrative account of her alleged experiences."
"The issue of [RB's]
competence lies, not in an impaired intellectual ability, but in a lack of experience of the world and lack of exposure to effective communication, i.e. British Sign Language. In spite of this, in many areas, she is skilled and perseveres well to make herself understood."
(D) – The racist
juror
"The court must also examine whether the court was impartial from an objective point ofview,
i.e. whether in the circumstances there were sufficient guarantees to exclude any objectively justified or legitimate doubts as to the impartiality of the court."
(E) – Video
recording
cross-examination
(F) – IA's
submission of no case on Counts 1 & 2
(G) – IA's
complaint about summing-up on Counts 1 & 2
"Are we sure that the Defendant was involved in arranging or facilitating the arrival ofRB
into the United Kingdom…, and that is sure that the Defendant was an active participant in bringing
RB
back to the UK."
(H) – IA's
submission of no case on benefit offences
(I) – Admissibility of violence
by TA and others
"References
in this Chapter to evidence of person's "bad character" are to evidence of, or a disposition towards, misconduct on his part, other than evidence which –
(a) as to do with the alleged facts of the offence with which the Defendant is charged…"
"For the purposes of this section a person is exploited if (and only if) –
(a) he is thevictim
of behaviour that contravenes Article 4 of the Human
Rights
Convention (slavery and forced labour)…"
(J) – FA and severance
(K) – FA's submission of no case
Conclusion