|[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]|
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions >> Horden, R. v  EWCA Crim 388 (20 February 2009)
Cite as: (2009) 173 JP 254,  2 Cr App R 24,  2 Cr App Rep 24,  Crim LR 588,  EWCA Crim 388
[New search] [View without highlighting] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
B e f o r e :
(Lord Justice Hughes)
MR JUSTICE WYN WILLIAMS
MR JUSTICE HOLROYDE
|R E G I N A|
|- v -|
|ALAN WILLIAM HORDEN|
Wordwave International Ltd (a Merrill Communications Company)
190 Fleet Street, London EC4
Telephone 020-7421 4040
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
Mr R S Gioserano appeared on behalf of the Crown
Crown Copyright ©
LORD JUSTICE HUGHES:
(1) Was there a sufficient reason for the judge to give that direction?
(2) If not, is the conviction in consequence unsafe?
"Alan Horden has come out of prison this morning with a marker for escape and has talked of attempting to escape. Has also markers for trying to get drugs passed on visits and had links to the drugs underworld.
On a previous court appearance we suspected that he was passed an item whilst in the dock from one of his co-accused. [The judge] witnessed this and instructed police and GSL to strip-search both defendants, although nothing was found.
With all this information I request handcuffs remain on during his court appearance today."
"The application is allowed. There is clear reason for this man to be prevented from escaping. He shall be in handcuffs throughout his time of these proceedings in open court."
It is to be observed that the judge rested that decision upon the risk of escaping. This was not a case in which there was any suggestion of a risk of violence. There had been a reference in the application to a suspicion that the appellant had either passed or received some form of contraband on a previous appearance in court, but this was not the reason why the judge ruled as he did. Nor could it have been because the appellant was standing trial on this occasion alone. The co-accused who had previously been indicted with him (who included his daughter) had been discharged.
"On 17 December 2007 the PER that accompanied [the appellant] from [the prison] had several risk markers with supporting information, those being: Medical Condition, Escape risk and Drugs and Alcohol with the supporting information stating 'well-known drugs baron, link with the drugs underworld, talked of possible escape in past, drugs on visits, possession of drugs'."
"In respect of a defendant received into GSL custody whose PER is annotated with an Escape Risk, GSL will prepare and submit a Handcuff in Court application to the court, in accordance with GSL Standard Operating Procedures, with full supporting information prior to the defendant's appearance in court."
We draw attention to the last few words of that proposition.