News
New Knife Crime Prevention Orders
The Home Secretary is radically stepping up the government’s response to knife crime and will be introducing new orders to prevent criminals carrying blades.
As part of decisive action to enhance police powers, the government will seek to amend the Offensive Weapons Bill to introduce Knife Crime Prevention Orders. This new deterrent can be imposed on any person aged 12 or over to prevent vulnerable young people from becoming involved in knife possession and knife crime. It can be imposed on anyone who police believe is carrying a knife, are habitual knife carriers or people previously convicted of a knife related offence.
The draft legislation can be found here.
'Pornography of adult consensual sex no longer taboo, says CPS'
Pornography produced by consenting adults engaging in legal acts will no longer be prosecuted under Britain’s historic obscenity laws, the Crown Prosecution Service has said.
A CPS spokesperson confirmed the change, which followed a public consultation: “It is not for the CPS to decide what is considered good taste or objectionable. We do not propose to bring charges based on material that depicts consensual and legal activity between adults, where no serious harm is caused and the likely audience is over the age of 18. The CPS will, however, continue to robustly apply the law to anything which crosses the line into criminal conduct and serious harm.”
'FGM: Mother guilty of genital mutilation of daughter'
A woman who mutilated her three-year-old daughter has become the first person in the UK to be found guilty of female genital mutilation (FGM).
Mrs Justice Whipple warned of a "lengthy" jail term as she remanded the woman into custody to be sentenced on 8 March.
It is only the fourth FGM prosecution brought to court in the UK. The previous cases led to acquittals.
Cases
Hallam, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice [2019] UKSC 2
These appeals concern the statutory provisions governing the eligibility for compensation of persons convicted of a criminal offence where their conviction is subsequently quashed (or they are pardoned) because of the impact of fresh evidence.
In summary, I am, for the reasons given, persuaded that it would be inappropriate to introduce into English law an interpretation of article 6(2) going beyond that identified by Lord Phillips, as set out in paras 37 and 47 above. But, in any event and even if article 6(2) does have a wider application in respect of claims not involving any criminal charge, I am not persuaded that section 133(1ZA) can or should be regarded as incompatible with article 6(2). For all these reasons a declaration of incompatibility is in my opinion inappropriate.
R (on the application of P) v Secretary of State for the Home Department and others [2019] UKSC 3
The four respondents to these appeals have all been convicted or received cautions or reprimands in respect of comparatively minor offending. The disclosure of their criminal records to potential employers has made it more difficult for them to obtain jobs, or may make it more difficult in future. In each case, the relevant convictions and cautions were “spent” under the legislation designed to enable ex-offenders to put their past behind them. They had to be disclosed only if the respondents applied for employment involving contact with children or vulnerable adults.
I would dismiss the appeals and affirm the declarations of incompatibility which both Courts of Appeal propose.
R v Patten [2018] EWCA Crim 2492
At 2.12 pm on 31 October the judge said this to the jury: "... we have reached a point at which I may now give you and do intend to give you a further direction. And it is to this effect. I still ask you do your best to reach verdicts upon which you are unanimous. That is to say verdicts upon which all 11 of you agree, one way or the other, but I can now and will accept verdicts upon which at least 9 of you agree. So that is 9 to 2 or 10 to 1... I will now accept verdicts upon which at least 9 of you agree; be they guilty, not guilty or a mixture of the two."
Thus, where there are 11 members of the jury, at least 10 of them must agree on the verdict. Only if the jury has reduced in number to 10 can a valid verdict be returned where nine members of the jury agree. In relation to the counts in respect of which Patten was convicted the verdicts were invalid. The convictions cannot stand.
Other
'Court closures and the cost of losing local justice'
Our justice system will be immeasurably poorer by the aggressive, short-sighted contraction of our court estate. Local knowledge, neighbourhood agencies and community justice have been gambled for large court centres making rulings from afar. The inevitable delays will waste public money. Complainants and witnesses will be inconvenienced. Police officers will be stretched. Decisions will be made in far-removed buildings distanced (in more ways than one) from the real crime on our streets.
The next time an advertisement surfaces for a luxury converted “Courthouse” building we ought to remember the real value of community justice and how much losing local courts might cost us all.
Sentencing Remarks in R v Festus Onasanya and Fiona Onasanya
Festus and Fiona Onasanya, I have to sentence you for offences of perverting the course of public justice. It is a tragedy that you find yourselves here and in this predicament; but it is a tragedy that you have brought upon yourselves.
On Count 2 of the indictment the sentence of the Court is that you will go to prison for 3 months, that being the shortest sentence that I feel able to impose consistent with my obligation to give effect to all the purposes of sentence – including deterrence.
Sponsored
Crime Fees - Free AGFS Calculator for iOS and Android
Crime Fees enables criminal barristers in England and Wales to easily calculate defence advocate fees under the new April 2018 AGFS (Scheme 10), and also under the proposed new Scheme 11 (currently under consultation).
No need to compare complex fee tables. Simply select the type of hearing and offence, set the number of trial days, and the app will tell you the fee.
Add each fee in the case to the basket and save for convenient reference until you have been paid.
Every permutation of case under the AGFS is catered for - the 3 advocate types, the 19 types of hearing, the 17 offence bands, and the 915 offences.