DOCSLIB.ORG

Supreme Court of Judicature of Jamaica CRIMINAL BENCH BOOK Supreme Court of Judicature of Jamaica CRIMINAL BENCH BOOK

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Supreme Court of Judicature of Jamaica CRIMINAL BENCH BOOK Supreme Court of Judicature of Jamaica CRIMINAL BENCH BOOK Supreme Court of Judicature of Jamaica CRIMINAL BENCH BOOK Supreme Court of Judicature of Jamaica CRIMINAL BENCH BOOK The Honourable Mr Justice F Algernon Smith CD Retired Judge of Appeal The Honourable Mr Justice Karl Harrison CD Retired Judge of Appeal Foreword by The Honourable Mrs Justice Zaila R McCalla OJ Chief Justice of Jamaica Published on behalf of the Government of Jamaica by NOT FOR SALE OR PURCHASE First published in Jamaica, 2017 by The Caribbean Law Publishing Company an imprint of Ian Randle Publishers 16 Herb McKenley Drive P.O. Box 686, Kingston 6 Jamaica, W.I. www.ianrandlepublishers.com © Government of Jamaica ISBN 978-976-8167-90-3 (ebook) NATIONAL LIBRARY OF JAMAICA CATALOGUING IN PUBLICATION DATA A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the National Library of Jamaica. Disclaimer and Agreement for Use 1. This Bench Book is issued by the Judicial Education Institute of Jamaica. 2. It is important for any user of this Bench Book to understand that it is intended for the use of judges as a guide only. Judges are required suitably to adapt them to the individual case. 3. The Institute does not warrant or make any representation that the contents of the Bench Book is free from errors or omissions. This guide is not intended to be a textbook on criminal law or procedure. Neither is it intended to be exhaustive. The duty lies upon judges, with the assistance of counsel where appropriate, to ensure that any directions given are, as a matter of law, accurate and up-to-date. 4. There will inevitably be occasions when the courts will find that certain of these specimen directions or the notes thereto are incomplete, require adjustment or even that they do not accurately represent the law. 5. The Bench Book will periodically be updated to reflect such changes in the law as come to the Institute’s attention but there will necessarily be a time lag before those changes are reflected. 6. Users of this guide and of the website upon which it is posted are responsible for making their own assessment of the information. The guide should not be used or relied upon as a substitute for independent research or independent legal advice. It is up to the users themselves to verify the accuracy of the information in this guide and to ensure that it is up to date. 7. For the reasons stated, the guide is provided and posted on the internet on the strict understanding that the Judicial Education Institute of Jamaica and its members and agents disclaim all liability for any claims arising, whether directly or indirectly, by reason of any person using or relying on the information in this guide. Agreement for Use By opening this Bench Book you are agreeing: (1) that you have read this disclaimer and agree with the terms and conditions of use of this guide; and (2) that you may use the guide or any information in it personally for legal professional practice but you will not use the same for any commercial publication or activity. Judicial Education Institute of Jamaica All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the Government of Jamaica. Cover and Publication Design by The Caribbean Law Publishing Company Printed in the United States of America CONTENTS Foreword ix Preface xi Acknowledgements xiii Table of Statutes xvii Table of Cases xx Sources xxxix Abbreviations xli 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1-1 Timing of Directions of Law 1 1-2 Written Direction and Routes to Verdict 1 1-3 Summing-up Checklist 3 2. JURY MANAGEMENT 5 2-1 Empanelling the Jury 5 2-2 Challenge of a Juror 6 2-3 Discharging a Juror or Jury 9 2-4 Conducting a View of the Locus In Quo 14 3. TRIAL MANAGEMENT 17 3-1 Opening Remarks to the Jury 17 3-2 Defendant Unfit to Plead and/or Stand Trial 21 3-3 Trial in the Absence of the Defendant 25 3-4 Trial of One Defendant in the Absence of Another/Others 29 3-5 Defendant in Person 32 3-6 Special Measures 36 3-7 Intermediaries 38 3-8 Interpreters 40 4. FUNCTIONS OF JUDGE AND JURY 44 5. BURDEN AND STANDARD OF PROOF 47 6. THE INDICTMENT 50 6-1 The Form of the Indictment – Separate Consideration of Counts 50 6-2 Specimen Counts 52 6-3 Alternative Offences/Alternative Verdicts 52 7. CRIMINAL LIABILITY 55 7-1 Child Defendants 55 7-2 Joint Participation in an Offence 57 7-3 Joint Principals 58 7-4 Accessory/Secondary Liability 59 7-5 The Abolition of Parasitic Accessory/Joint Enterprise 71 7-6 Withdrawal from Joint Criminal Liability 71 7-7 Conspiracy 74 7-8 Criminal Attempts 77 7-9 Causation 79 8. STATES OF MIND 84 8-1 Intention 84 8-2 Recklessness 88 8-3 Malice 92 8-4 Wilfullness 95 8-5 Knowledge, Belief and Suspicion 97 8-6 Mistake 101 9. INTOXICATION 105 10. EVIDENCE – GENERAL 111 10-1 Circumstantial Evidence 111 10-2 Corroboration and the Special Need for Caution 115 10-3 Expert Evidence 123 10-4 Delay 131 10-5 Evidence of Children and Other Vulnerable Witnesses 136 11. GOOD CHARACTER OF DEFENDANT 144 12. BAD CHARACTER OF DEFENDANT 154 12-1 Evidence of Bad Character – General Introduction 154 12-2 Directions Applicable to Admissible Bad Character Evidence 156 12-3 Evidence of Bad Character Adduced by the Defendant 157 12-4 Bad Character Evidence as Important Background/ Explanatory Evidence 159 12-5 Bad Character Evidence – Relevant to an Important Matter in Issue 160 12-6 Important Matter in Issue Between Defendant and Co-defendant 162 12-7 Evidence to Correct a False Impression Given by the Defendant, Going to Credit and Propensity 166 12-8 Section 9(f)(ii) – Defendant’s Attack on the Character of Prosecutor or the Prosecutor’s Witnesses 168 12-9 Non-Defendant’s Bad Character 169 13. SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE 171 14. HEARSAY 175 14-1 Hearsay General 175 14-2 Witness Absent– Section 31D Evidence Act 179 14-3 Business Documents 183 14-4 Introduced by Agreement – Sections 31C, 31CB, and 31CA of the Evidence Act 184 14-5 Previous Inconsistent Statement 187 14-6 Previous Inconsistent Statement of a Hostile Witness 188 14-7 Statement to Refresh Memory 190 14-8 Previous Consistent or Self-Serving Statements 191 14-9 Statement to Rebut Allegation of Recent Fabrication 192 14-10 Res Gestae 194 14-11 Statements in Furtherance of a Common Enterprise 197 14-12 Out of Court Statements Made by One Defendant 200 14-13 Dying Declarations 201 15. IDENTIFICATION 203 15-1 Visual Identification by A Witness/Witnesses 203 15-2 Identification from Visual Images: Comparison by the Jury 213 15-3 Identification from Visual Images by a Witness Who Knows The Defendant and so is Able to Recognise Him 217 15-4 Identification by Facial Mapping 219 15-5 Identification by Fingerprints 224 15-6 Identification by Voice 227 15-7 Identification DNA 233 16. DEFENDANT – THINGS SAID 246 16-1 Confessions 246 16-2 Lies 251 17. DEFENDANT – THINGS NOT SAID OR DONE 254 17-1 Silence or Conduct when Accused 254 17-2 Defendant’s Unsworn Statement at Trial 256 18. DEFENCES – GENERAL 258 18-1 Self-Defence/ Prevention of Crime/ Protection of Household 258 18-2 Alibi 271 18-3 Duress 275 18-4 Sane Automatism 280 18-5 M’Naghten Insanity including Insane Automatism 283 18-6 The Defence of Accident 287 19. DEFENCES – MURDER 290 19-1 Diminished Responsibility - Abnormality of Mind 290 19-2 Provocation 295 20. SEXUAL OFFENCES 303 20-1 Special Provisions 303 20-2 Historical Allegations 314 20-3 Grooming of Children 316 20-4 Consent and Reasonable Belief in Consent 317 20-5 Capacity and Voluntary Intoxication 318 20-6 Recent Complaint and Distress 323 21. ANTI-GANG OFFENCES 326 22. TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS 330 23. MANSLAUGHTER 335 24. MOTOR MANSLAUGHTER/ DEATH BY DANGEROUS DRIVING 337 25. VERDICT AND DELIBERATIONS 344 25-1 Adjournments 344 25-2 Unanimous Verdicts and Deliberations 345 25-3 Taking Partial Verdicts 347 25-4 Majority Verdicts 347 25-5 Watson Direction 349 25-6 Alternative Verdicts 351 25-7 If the Jury Cannot Ultimately Reach a Verdict 352 25-8 Final Remarks to the Jury 352 26. ANNEXES 353 ANNEX 1 - Special Measures Aide Memoire 353 ANNEX 2 - Practice Direction (Criminal) 356 Schedule Forms 363 Foreword Summation to a jury in the trial of a criminal case requires a thorough knowledge of the case, preparation of the summation and clear delivery to the jury. Jamaican judges have consistently executed this task and have satisfied those requirements in doing so. They have, however, carried out that task without the benefit of a bench book that collates in one place all the material that is usually required for achieving the purpose of a summation. Judges, up to this point, largely have had to put together for themselves the material that they need for carrying out the task of directing juries. This situation has added to the burden of their jobs and led to many variations in the way in which juries are directed. It cannot be denied that a number of successful appeals against convictions have been as a result of misdirections to the jury by the trial judge. Some of those misdirections, no doubt have been as a result of the unavailability to the judge of ready access to guidance from a reliable legal publication dealing with the particular offence being tried.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Criminal Law
    Part A Bar Examinations 2015 Criminal Law Subject Coordinator: Dr S. Chandra Mohan School of Law, Singapore Management University Singapore Institute of Legal Education Part A Bar Examinations 2015 SINGAPORE INSTITUTE OF LEGAL EDUCATION Part A Bar Examinations 2015 Criminal Law (Version: 14 May 2015) INTRODUCTION The Part A Bar Examination in Criminal Law is designed to test whether overseas law graduates have obtained sufficient knowledge of the fundamental principles of criminal law in Singapore and understand how these are applied within Singapore’s criminal justice system. It is important that students keep in mind the relevant local legislative provisions and the court decisions that have interpreted these provisions (see the detailed Reading List). Singapore’s criminal law is codified and is principally contained in the Penal Code which was enacted in 1870. It is based on the Indian Penal Code and its provisions are not always similar to the English Criminal Law which its drafter, Lord Macaulay, sought to improve. Two core values of such a written Code that students must bear in mind are accessibility of the penal provisions and comprehensibility so that the layman can obtain and understand the law better. The use of ‘explanations’ and ‘illustrations’ in the sections, which give examples of the application of the provisions, are unique to the Penal Code. As the Penal Codes of India and Malaysia are similar to our Code, cases from these jurisdictions are of persuasive value in interpreting identical provisions. There are other statutes which provide for specific offences such as the Misuse of Drugs Act and the Prevention of Corruption Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Tainted by Torture Examining the Use of Torture Evidence a Report by Fair Trials and REDRESS May 2018
    Tainted by Torture Examining the Use of Torture Evidence A report by Fair Trials and REDRESS May 2018 1 Fair Trials is a global criminal justice watchdog with offices in London, Brussels and Washington, D.C., focused on improving the right to a fair trial in accordance with international standards. Fair Trials’ work is premised on the belief that fair Its work combines: (a) helping suspects to trials are one of the cornerstones of a just society: understand and exercise their rights; (b) building an they prevent lives from being ruined by miscarriages engaged and informed network of fair trial defenders of justice, and make societies safer by contributing to (including NGOs, lawyers and academics); and (c) transparent and reliable justice systems that maintain fighting the underlying causes of unfair trials through public trust. Although universally recognised in research, litigation, political advocacy and campaigns. principle, in practice the basic human right to a fair trial is being routinely abused. Contacts: Jago Russell Roseanne Burke Chief Executive Legal and Communications Assistant [email protected] [email protected] For press queries, please contact: Alex Mik Campaigns and Communications Manager [email protected] +44 (0)207 822 2370 For more information about Fair Trials: Web: www.fairtrials.net Twitter: @fairtrials 2 Tainted by Torture: Examining the Use of Torture Evidence | 2018 REDRESS is an international human rights organisation that represents victims of torture and related international crimes to obtain justice and reparation. REDRESS brings legal cases on behalf of individual Its work includes research and advocacy to identify victims of torture, and advocates for better laws to the changes in law, policy and practice that are provide effective reparations.
    [Show full text]
  • A Legal Response to Colin Holmes
    J Med Ethics: first published as 10.1136/jme.17.2.86 on 1 June 1991. Downloaded from Journal ofmedical ethics, 1991, 17, 86-88 Psychopathic disorder: a category mistake? A legal response to Colin Holmes Irene Mackay University ofManchester Author's abstract diminished responsibility upon which I propose to comment. Holmes is concerned with a conflict between law and The absence of any established medical or medicine about the problem ofpsychopathy, in particular psychiatric definition of 'moral insanity' or as it relates to homicide. 'psychopathy' is noteworthy in this article by Colin He looksfor a consistent set oflegal principles based on Holmes. It is not clear whether either can be referred to a variety ofmedical concepts and in doing so criticises the correctly as an illness or whether the two could be courtfor its commonsense approach, its disregardfor synonymous. Moral insanity is referred to as 'absence medical evidence andfor employing lay notions of of conscience', 'no capacity for true moral feelings', responsibility and illness. 'depravity', and 'absence of moral scruple'. This commentary explores how Holmes's notionsfit into Psychopathy appears to mean 'total lack ofcopyright. existing legal rules and explains how the court seeks the compunction or consequent moral emotion', 'absence assistance ofmedical evidence when looking at the evidence of conscience', 'inability to experience guilt' and 'lack as a whole to enable it to decide upon issues ofdefence, of respect for the moral claims of others'. which involve legal and not medical concepts. Holmes is concerned with the conflict between law There is a difficulty inherent in this paper, as it seeks to and medicine about what he refers to as the problem of psychopathy.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Law and Litigation CPD Update
    prepared for Criminal Law and Litigation CPD Update Andrew Clemes CPD Training 2008 edition in Law ILEX CPD reference code: L22/P22 CPD © 2008 Copyright ILEX Tutorial College Limited All materials included in this ITC publication are copyright protected. All rights reserved. Any unauthorised reproduction or transmission of any part of this publication, whether electronically or otherwise, will constitute an infringement of copyright. No part of this publication may be lent, resold or hired out for any purpose without the prior written permission of ILEX Tutorial College Ltd. WARNING: Any person carrying out an unauthorised act in relation to this copyright work may be liable to both criminal prosecution and a civil claim for damages. This publication is intended only for the purpose of private study. Its contents were believed to be correct at the time of publication or any date stated in any preface, whichever is the earlier. This publication does not constitute any form of legal advice to any person or organisation. ILEX Tutorial College Ltd will not be liable for any loss or damage of any description caused by the reliance of any person on any part of the contents of this publication. Published in 2008 by: ILEX Tutorial College Ltd College House Manor Drive Kempston Bedford United Kingdom MK42 7AB Preface This update has been prepared by ILEX Tutorial College (ITC) to assist Fellows and Members of the Institute of Legal Executives (ILEX) in meeting their continuing professional development (CPD) or lifelong learning requirements for 2008. Fellows are required to complete 16 hours of CPD in 2008 and Members eight hours of CPD.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison of R. V. Stone with R. V. Parks: Two Cases of Automatism
    ANALYSIS AND COMMENTARY A Comparison of R. v. Stone with R. v. Parks: Two Cases of Automatism Graham D. Glancy, MB, ChB, John M. Bradford, MB, ChB, and Larissa Fedak, BPE, MSc, LLB J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 30:541–7, 2002 Both the medical and legal professions recognize that The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Dis- some criminal actions take place in the absence of orders, fourth edition (DMS-IV),3 does not define consciousness and intent, thereby inferring that these automatism, although it does include several diag- actions are less culpable. However, experts enter a noses, such as delirium or parasomnias, that could be legal quagmire when medical expert evidence at- the basis for automatism. tempts to find some common meaning for the terms The seminal legal definition is that of Lord Den- “automatism” and “unconsciousness.” ning in Bratty v. A-G for Northern Ireland: 1 The Concise Oxford Dictionary defines autom- . .an act which is done by the muscles without any control by atism as “Involuntary action. (Psych) action per- the mind, such as a spasm, a reflex action, or a convulsion; or an formed unconsciously or subconsciously.” This act done by a person who is not conscious of what he is doing, seems precise and simple until we attempt to de- such as an act done while suffering from concussion or while 4 fine unconscious or subconscious. Fenwick2 notes sleepwalking. that consciousness is layered and that these layers This was developed by Canadian courts in R. v. Ra- largely depend on subjective behavior that is ill de- bey: fined.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Profile
    Maryam Mir Call: 2011 Email: [email protected] Profile Maryam is a popular choice amongst lay and professional clients for her detailed preparation, fearless advocacy in court and personable nature. She is a compassionate listener who fights for her clients with determination and gets great results. Maryam has experience in a wide range of criminal offences. As a led junior, Maryam is instructed in cases involving homicide, firearms, terrorism and large scale fraud. As leading counsel, she has defended in cases of serious violence, conspiracy to supply firearms, politically motivated offending from terrorism to protest, financial crime, fraud and regulatory matters, sexual offences, drugs supply conspiracies and kidnapping. She worked on several high-profile terrorism cases during her secondment with Reprieve, representing leaders of political parties sanctioned as terrorists by the UN, US and UK. She was part of a team that brought the first due process challenge in the US against the inclusion of a US citizen on a “Kill List”, whilst reporting on the conflict in Syria. She has experience in cases involving legal challenges to the use of state extra-judicial killing by drones and/or mercenaries. She assists individuals challenging their listing by the UN Security Council Counter-Terrorism Committee. Maryam is experienced in advising on appeals against conviction and sentence before the Criminal Division of the Court of Appeal. Maryam is determined to encourage other ethnic minority women to enter and stay in the profession. She
    [Show full text]
  • INSANITY PLEA: a RETROSPECTIVE EXAMINATION of the VERDICT of "NOT GUILTY on the GROUND of INSANITY" Abstract
    Document hosted at http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentViewer.aspx?fid=34dc6c62-a9eb-49cf-b24a-f906ee2528c5 INSANITY PLEA: A RETROSPECTIVE EXAMINATION OF THE VERDICT OF "NOT GUILTY ON THE GROUND OF INSANITY" by Sally Ramage Abstract This paper argues that insanity should be eliminated as a separate defence, but that the effects of mental disorder should still carry signifcant moral weight in that mental illness should be relevant in assessing culpability only as warranted by general criminal law doctrines concerning mens rea, self-defence and duress. This study was triggered by the case R v Central Criminal Court, ex parte Peter William Young1 . Peter Young had been charged with dishonestly concealing material facts contrary to s47 (1) Financial services Act 1986. The case considered Peter Young's intentions, not in relation to dishonesty, and not in relation to the purpose of the making of the representations, but as to the state of the defendant's intention in relation to the facts. Leave to Appeal to the House of Lords was refused. Literature Review on English `insanity' caselaw No analysis of a legal issue is complete without a literature review of the subject. Stephen Gilchrist wrote a short article in 19992 in which he discussed the Court of Appeal decision in R v Antoine3 in which the defence of diminished responsibility under s.2 Homicide Act 1957 applied. In the year 2000, Sean Enright4 wrote a one- page review on the power to commit defendants acquitted on the grounds of insanity to a mental institution for an unlimited period. He reviewed two cases R v Maidstone Crown Court, ex parte Harrow London Borough Council [2001 and R v Crown Court at Snaresbrook, exparte Director of the Serious Fraud Ofce [19971.
    [Show full text]
  • Canadian Insanity Defence Reform : Capturing a New Spirit of Mcnaughtan
    CANADIAN INSANITY DEFENCE REFORM: CAJX"I'R1NGA NEW SPIRIT OF MCNAUGHTAN. Cheryl S. Angelomatis B.A., Simon Fraser University, 1981 THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS (CRIMINOLOGY) in the Department of Criminology 0 Cheryl S. Angelomatis 1983 Ib SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY October, 1983 All rights reserved. This work may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without permission of the author. APPROVAL Name: Cheryl S. Angelomatis Degree: MASTER OF ARTS (CRIMINOLOGY) Title of thesis: CANADIAN INSANITY DEFENCE REFORM: CAPTURING A NEW SPIRIT OF McNAUGHTAN. Examining Committee: -. ,/John W. Ekstedt Chairperson, Associate ~rdfesbor,Crkinology Simon N. vep- ones Senior Supe isor, Associate Professor, Criminology - Ib - - - Duncan Chappell, Progessor, CripinoTogy ~ki-1Boyd I Associate ~rofe!&sor,Criminology - - Yudi th Osborne, External Examiner, Instructor, Criminology Date Approved: November 21, 1983 PARTIAL COPYRIGHT LICENSE I hereby grant to Simon Fraser University the right to lend my thesis, project or extended essay (the title of which is shown below) to users of the Simon Fraser University L ibrary, and to make partial or single copies only for such users or in response to a request from the library of any other university, or othar educational institution, on its own behalf or for one of its users. I further agree that permission for multiple copying of this work for scholarly purposes may be granted by me or the Dean of Graduate Studies. It is understood that copy i ng or publication of this work for financ ial gain shall no-i be a I lowed without my written permission.
    [Show full text]
  • 545 a Critique of Canadian Criminal Legislation Part
    545 A CRITIQUE OF CANADIAN CRIMINAL LEGISLATION PART ONE I.Introduction Scope of the study The main object of this study is an examination of the concepts of Canadian legislators as to the nature of criminality and their attitude toward the problem of crime. Its purpose is not an exposition, either descriptive or critical, of Canadian criminal law and procedure. It is to be noted at the outset that all the legislation in force in Canada which in some way pertains to the subject of crime is by no means to be found in some section of the Criminal Codel. However, in view of the fact that the Code, 'with its 1152 sections, deals with the great bulk of Canadian criminal law and procedure, it seems justifiable to assume that its history may be taken as fairly representative of the development of Canadian criminal legislation. Therefore the present discussion will be confined primarily to the Criminal Code, with only incidental reference to other statutes. It will be an attempt to consider, in a general way, the sources of the Code, the cir- cumstances surrounding its adoption, its underlying principles, and the course of amendment since it was first established . The matter which will be made the subject of a more detailed consideration will be the attitudes of the legislators towards the crime problem and the results thereof as shown in the development of the Code from the date of its adoption to the present time. To this end, after a discussion of the back- * Submitted as a thesis in the seminar in Criminology in Relation to Criminal Law and Procedure by Professor Sheldon Glueck, and in the seminar in Legislation by Professor James McC.
    [Show full text]
  • Cook Islands Justices Bench Book, Second Edition
    THE COOK ISLANDS JUSTICES BENCH BOOK Second edition 2012 The Cook Islands Justices Bench Book ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The second edition of the Cook Islands Justices Bench Book was developed by Christopher Roper, in a project conducted by the Pacific Judicial Development Programme. Significant contributions were made by the following people in the Cook Islands, particularly in a three day series of meetings in February 2012: Mataira Ake JP Claudine Henry-Anguna, Registrar of the High Court Tekeu Framhein JP Georgina Keenan-Williams JP John Kenning JP Teati Mokoroa, Deputy Registrar of the High Court Kautai Ruaporo, Court Clerk Tuingariki Short JP Tauei Solomon JP Tangi Taoro JP Carmen Temata JP Tinirau Tupa, Court Clerk Taepae Tuteru JP © High Court of the Cook Islands i The Cook Islands Justices Bench Book QUICK GUIDE TO FIND WHAT YOU NEED Adjournments Go to Tab 12 Bail applications Go to Tab 13 Child witnesses Go to Tab 19 – section 19.5.4 Contempt of court Go to Tab 19 – section 19.6 Guilty pleas Go to Tab 11 – section 11.5 Jurisdiction of justices Go to Tab 3 – section 3.5 Name suppression Go to Tab 14 No case to answer Go to Tab 16 – section 16.6 Probation Go to Tab 15 – section 15.5.2 Remanding in custody Go to Tab 13 – section 13.3 ii The Cook Islands Justices Bench Book CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS IN BRIEF FOUNDATIONS 1 The constitutional context 2 The law in the Cook Islands 3 Introduction to the High Court 4 Dealing with evidence 5 Criminal law and human rights 6 Principles of criminal responsibility 7 Judicial conduct IN THE COURT
    [Show full text]
  • Cases and Materials on Criminal Law
    Cases and Materials on Criminal Law Michael T Molan Head ofthe Division ofLaw South Bank University Graeme Broadbent Senior Lecturer in Law Bournemouth University PETMAN PUBLISHING Contents Preface ix Acknowledgements x Table ofcases xi Table of Statutes xxiii 1 External elements of liability 1 Proof - Woolmington v DPP - Criminal Appeal Act 1968 - The nature of external elements - R v Deller - Larsonneur - Liability for omissions - R v Instan - R v Stone and Dobinson - Fagan v Metropolitan Police Commissioner - R v Miller - R v Speck - Causation in law -Äv Pagett - Medical treatment - R v Sw/YA - R v Cheshire - The victim's reaction as a «ovtt.j öcto interveniens — Rv Blaue - R v Williams 2 Fault 21 Intention -Äv Hancock and Shankland - R v Nedrick - Criminal Justice Act 1967 s.8 - Recklessness -fiv Cunningham - R v Caldwell - R v Lawrence - Elliott \ C -R\ Reid -Rv Satnam; R v Kevra/ - Coincidence of acft« re«i and /nens rea - Thabo Meli v R - Transferred malice -Rv Pembliton -Rv Latimer 3 Liability without fault 56 Cundy v Le Cocq - Sherras v De Rutzen - SWef v Parsley - L/OT CA/« /4/£ v R - Gammon Ltd v Attomey-General for Hong Kong - Pharmaceutical Society ofGreat Britain v Storkwain 4 Factors affecting fault 74 Mistake - Mistake of fact negativing fault -Rv Tolson - DPP v Morgan - Mistake as to an excuse or justification - R v Kimber - R v Williams (Gladstone) - Beckford v R - Intoxication - DPP v Majewski - Rv Caldwell - Rv Hardie - R v Woods - R v O'Grady - Mental Disorder - M'Naghten's Case -Rv Kemp - Rv Sullivan - R v Hennessy
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Cybercrime
    PRINCIPLES OF CYBERCRIME Digital technology has transformed the way in which we socialise and do business. Proving the maxim that crime follows opportunity, virtually every advance has been accompanied by a corresponding niche to be exploited for criminal purposes; so-called ‘cybercrimes’. Whether it be fraud, child pornography, stalking, criminal copyright infringement or attacks on computers themselves, criminals will find ways to exploit new technology. The challenge for all countries is to ensure their criminal laws keep pace. The challenge is a global one, and much can be learned from the experience of other jurisdictions. Focusing on Australia, Canada, the UK and the USA, this book provides a comprehensive analysis of the legal principles that apply to the prosecution of cybercrimes. This new edition has been fully revised to take into account changes in online offending, as well as new case law and legislation in this rapidly developing area of the law. jonathan clough is a professor in the Faculty of Law at Monash University, Australia. He teaches and researches in the areas of criminal law and evidence, with a particular focus on cybercrime. In addition to teaching cybercrime in the Monash LLM programme, he has written numerous articles on the topic. He has also provided advice to govern- ment on cybercrime-related issues, and was a member of the Common- wealth Working Group of Experts on Cybercrime. /47879CBD, 645C7:8 C:6C8 04D38CD28B4,,D5868.45C7:8.C88CD 9D8444584BD, 645C7:8 C:6C88CD BD,7 C: .1 /47879CBD, 645C7:8 C:6C8 04D38CD28B4,,D5868.45C7:8.C88CD 9D8444584BD, 645C7:8 C:6C88CD BD,7 C: .1 PRINCIPLES OF CYBERCRIME second edition JONATHAN CLOUGH /47879CBD, 645C7:8 C:6C8 04D38CD28B4,,D5868.45C7:8.C88CD 9D8444584BD, 645C7:8 C:6C88CD BD,7 C: .1 University Printing House, Cambridge CB2 8BS, United Kingdom Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.
    [Show full text]