Bail Flashcards
1
Q
Power to Adjourn
A
- At any stage before the case is sent to the Crown Court for trial or before (or during) a summary trial, a magistrates’ court may adjourn the proceedings
2
Q
is it possible to challenge the grant or refusal of an adjournment?
A
YES
by way of judicial review
3
Q
Court’s usual position when interfering with a decision to refuse an adjournment
A
the Divisional Court will be ‘particularly slow’ to interfere with a decision to refuse an adjournment, given the discretionary nature of that decision
o Gross LJ said (at [21]) that the grant or refusal of an adjournment ‘is a paradigm example of a discretionary case management decision where an appeal ought only to succeed on well-recognised but limited grounds (for example, error of principle, error of law or where the decision can properly be characterised as plainly wrong)’.
4
Q
A
- Pari-Jones v CPS [2018] EWHC 3482 (Admin), where the magistrates’ court had refused an adjournment despite the fact that neither D nor her solicitor could attend court because of bad weather. —-» Andrews J, remitting the case for retrial, said (at [12]) that it was ‘self-evident that if the magistrates had taken into account the relevant considerations and if they had balanced [D’s] right to a fair trial with the lack of fault caused by the weather conditions, the fact that she had already attended court previously, and all the other relevant considerations, they could not have refused this adjournment’.
– R (Parashar) v Sunderland Magistrates’ Court [2019] EWHC 514 (Admin), [2019] 2 Cr App R 3 (18), where it was held that ‘the decision to fix a date for a trial at which the prosecution expert could attend and the defence expert (whose report had been served in good time) could not was clearly wrong’ (per Bean LJ, at [46]). His lordship noted that if the trial had proceeded on that basis, D’s ability to present his defence ‘would have been seriously compromised and the trial would inevitably have been unfair’. Simler J concurred, saying (at [49]):
To insist on a trial date on which the prosecution expert was available but the defence expert was not was wrong and would have led to an unfair trial. There is a high public interest in summary trials taking place quickly and on the day set for trial, and in adjournments not being granted absent compelling reasons. But it is also necessary as a matter of fairness and in the interests of justice, where a defence request to vacate a trial date is made, to consider whether, if it is not granted, the defendant will be able fully to present his defence, and if he will not be able to do so, the degree to which the defence will be compromised
5
Q
Court has held that, unless the admissibility is challenged, the judge will admit the evidence as sufficient safeguards are provided by the rules on pre-trial disclosure
A
6
Q
The MCA 1980, s. 128(1), provides that, whenever a magistrates’ court has power to remand a person, it may remand in custody
remand in custody means…
A
committing the accused to custody to be brought before the court at the end of the period of remand or at such earlier time as the court may require
7
Q
The MCA 1980, s. 128(1), provides that, whenever a magistrates’ court has power to remand a person, it may remand on bail in accordance with the provisions of the BA 1976
remand in bail means…
A
directing the accused to appear before the court at the end of the period of the remand or, if bail is made continuous, directing that the accused appear at every time to which the proceedings may be adjourned
8
Q
Sections 10(4) and 18(4) provide (in almost identical terms) that, on adjourning proceedings for an either way offence, the court must remand the accused (on bail or in custody) unless the accused:
A
(a) first appeared in answer to a summons or requisition (as opposed to being brought before the court in custody or appearing in answer to police bail); and
(b) has not been remanded at an earlier hearing.
9
Q
Court considering bail once D is charged:
A
- Can never be any guarantee of bail once a defendant is charged
10
Q
Fixing date for next hearing when adjourned or remand:
Where a case is simply adjourned, there is no need to fix the date for the next hearing at the time of adjourning
A
If there is a remand the adjournment date must be fixed forthwith and is the date to which the accused is remanded
11
Q
An accused who has been remanded on bail and who then fails without reasonable cause to surrender to custody …
A
commits an offence under the BA 1976.
12
Q
The maximum period for which a magistrates’ court may remand an accused in custody is
A
‘eight clear days’
13
Q
Exception to the ‘eight clear days’
(maximum period for which a magistrates’ court may remand an accused in custody)
A
following summary conviction, there may be a remand in custody of up to three weeks (four weeks if the remand is not in custody) for inquiries, such as a pre-sentence report, to be made into the most suitable method of dealing with the accused
14
Q
Further remands
A
A person who is brought before the court after an earlier remand may be remanded again
15
Q
Further remands
The only limitation on the number of remands is the general discretion of magistrates to refuse an adjournment if it would be against the interests of justice
A
e.g., because they consider that the party requesting the adjournment should have been ready to proceed on the present occasion
16
Q
By s. 130, a court remanding an accused in custody may order that, for subsequent remands, the accused be brought up before a different magistrates’ court nearer to the prison where the accused is to be confined while on remand.
A
That alternate court then enjoys the same powers in relation to remand that the original court would otherwise have.
17
Q
Under the MCA 1980, s. 128(6)(a), the accused may be remanded for a period greater than eight clear days if the remand is on bail and both the accused and the prosecution agree to a longer period of remand.
A
18
Q
- S22 Prosecution of Offences Act 1985: empowers the SoS to make regulations
fixing:
A
(a) the max period available to the prosecution to complete any preliminary (pre-trial) stage of proceedings; and/or
(b) the max period for which an accused may be kept in custody while awaiting
completion of such a stage
19
Q
Time-limits within which prosecution must complete the stage of proceeding in question
A
– The regulations may prescribe an overall time-limit within which prosecution must complete the stage of the proceedings in question. However, no overall time-limits currently apply.
- Alternatively or additionally, the regulations may prescribe a custody time-limit, that being the max period for which the accused may be remanded in custody while the stage of proceedings is being completed
20
Q
Between first appearance and committal. By reg. 4(2) and (4), the maximum period for which an accused charged with an indictable offence may be held in the custody of the magistrates’ court between first appearance and committal proceedings is
A
70 days.
21
Q
(b) Between first appearance and summary trial. If the offence is triable either way and the court determines to try the case summarily, the maximum period in custody between first appearance and the court beginning to hear evidence for the prosecution is
A
70 days.
unless the decision for summary trial is taken within 56 days, in which case the limit is reduced to 56 days
22
Q
In the case of a summary offence, the maximum period is
A
56 days (reg. 4(4A)).
23
Q
Between committal and trial on indictment, the maximum period for which an accused committed for trial to the Crown Court may be held in custody between ‘committal’ and the start of trial is
A
112 days.
24
Q
Multiple committals.
If a single indictment is preferred containing counts in respect of which the accused was committed for trial on two or more different occasions, does the 112-day limit applies separately in relation to each offence?
A
YES!
25
Section 51 sending. Where the accused has been sent for trial under the CDA 1998, s. 51, the maximum period is 182 days between the date on which the accused is sent to the Crown Court and the start of the trial.
From this maximum must be deducted any period during which the accused was held in custody by the magistrates
26
Retrial directed by the Court of Appeal.
where an indictment is preferred by
direction of CA following order of a retrial, 112 days limit applies from that preferment
27
Voluntary bill.
Where proceedings are by way of a voluntary bill of indictment the 112-day period runs from the date of preferment of the bill
28
Where proceedings are by way of a voluntary bill of indictment the 112-day period runs from the date of preferment of the bill
it must bail the accused as from the expiry of the limit, subject to a duty to attend for trial.
29
The regulations do not expressly deal with the procedure for bailing an accused who has the benefit of the 70-day time-limit between charge and committal or summary trial.
In R (Jabbar) v Sheffield Crown Court [2022] EWHC 516 (Admin), it was underlined that once a custody time-limit is not extended and expires, the custody time- limit regime ceases to operate and will not apply to any further period of remand.
30
Procedure for Seeking an Extension of Time-limits
At any time before the expiry of a time-limit, the Crown Court, if the accused has already been committed for trial, or the magistrates’ court, in other cases, may extend the limit if satisfied of two matters:
(a) that ‘the prosecution has acted with all due diligence and expedition’, and
(b) that there is ‘good and sufficient cause for doing so’
31
Procedure for Seeking an Extension of Time-limits
the Divisional Court observed that the extension of custody timelimits should be addressed at the time that a trial date was fixed outwith the existing limit (in that case to accommodate the convenience of counsel), rather than after the decision as to listing had already been made. Further procedural guidance relating to custody time-limit extensions is contained in CrimPD XIII, Listing, para. F.4 (see Supplement, CPD.XIII.F).
32
‘Bail in criminal proceedings’ is defined in s. 1(1) of the Act as:
‘(a) bail grantable in or in connection with proceedings for an offence to a person who is accused or convicted of the offence, or
(b) bail grantable in connection with an offence to a person who is under arrest for the offence or for whose arrest for the offence a warrant (endorsed for bail) is being issued’.
33
Bail by MC
- The remand may be in custody or on bail
- Power to grant bail for the period of any remand for reports after summary conviction + remands on bail for medical examination
34
Where a magistrates’ court sends an accused to the Crown Court for trial under the CDA 1998, s. 51, the accused may be kept in custody or released on bail
- committals for sentence may be in custody or on bail
35
Where a magistrates’ court has summarily convicted an accused and passed a custodial sentence, it may grant bail pending the determination of an appeal to the Crown Court or to the Divisional Court by way of case stated
36
Bail Jurisdiction in Murder Cases
The CAJA 2009, s. 115(1), provides that a person charged with murder may not be granted bail except by order of a Crown Court judge.
A person who appears before a magistrates’ court charged with murder must be committed (in custody) to the Crown Court
A Crown Court judge must then make a decision about bail as soon as reasonably practicable and, in any event, within the period of 48 hours (excluding weekends and public holidays) beginning with the day after the day on which the person appears before the magistrates’ court (s. 115(3)).
These provisions apply whether or not the accused is charged with any offences in addition to the murder charge (s. 115(6)).
37
Bail by the Crown Court
- Under the Senior Courts Act 1981, s. 81(1)(a) to (g), the Crown Court may grant bail to any person:
(a) who has been sent in custody for trial in the Crown Court;
(b) who has been given a custodial sentence following conviction in the magistrates’ court (whether by guilty plea or a finding of guilty after trial) and who is appealing to the Crown Court against conviction and/or sentence;
(c) who is in the custody of the Crown Court pending disposal of the case (so whenever the Crown Court adjourns a trial or adjourns between conviction and sentence, it has a discretion to grant the accused bail for the period of the adjournment);
(d) and (e) whose case has been decided by the Crown Court but who has applied to the court to state a case for the Divisional Court’s opinion or is seeking judicial review of the decision;
(f ) to whom the Crown Court has granted a certificate that the case is fit for appeal to the Court of Appeal, whether against conviction or against sentence; and
(g) who has been remanded in custody by a magistrates’ court on adjourning a case under the PCC(S)A 2000, s. 11, the CDA 1998, s. 52(5), or the MCA 1980, ss. 10, 17C, 18 or 24C, provided the magistrates’ court has granted a certificate that, before refusing bail, it heard full argument.
38
PRINCIPLES GOVERNING BAIL
Presumption in Favour of Bail
- creates a rebuttable presumption in favour of bail (right to bail)
It provides that: ‘A person to whom this section applies shall be granted bail except as provided in Schedule 1 to this Act’. Subsections (2) to (4) of s. 4 then define the persons who benefit from the presumption in favour of bail. They are any person:
(a) who appears before the Crown Court or a magistrates’ court in the course of or in connection with proceedings for an offence, or applies to a court for bail (or for a variation of the conditions of bail) in connection with those proceedings (s. 4(2)); (b)
(b) who has been convicted of an offence and whose case is adjourned for reports before sentencing (s. 4(4)); and
(c) who has been brought before the court under the SA 2020, sch. 10, for alleged breach of a requirement of a community order (s. 4(3)).
-
39
Presumption in Favour of Bail
- Section 4(1) of the BA 1976
- Apart from cases where the accused has been convicted and the hearing has been adjourned for pre-sentence reports, s. 4(1) does not apply once a person has been convicted of an offence (as is made clear in the proviso to s. 4(2)).
- Therefore, an appellant seeking bail pending determination of an appeal against conviction and/or sentence cannot rely on the presumption in favour of bail.
- Neither can an offender who is committed to the Crown Court for sentence following conviction in a magistrates’ court.
- In both those situations, there is power to grant bail, but its grant or refusal is entirely at the discretion of the court. It should also be noted that s. 4(1) does not apply to bail from the police station, although, once a detainee has been charged, the PACE 1984, s. 38(1), imposes on the custody officer a duty to grant bail unless its refusal can be justified on grounds similar to those which would justify a court refusing bail under the BA 1976 (see D2.47 et seq.).
Whenever bail is granted in criminal proceedings (whether or not subject to the presumption in s. 4), the general provisions of the Act concerning bail apply (e.g., a person who fails without reasonable cause to surrender commits an offence under s. 6).
40
Exceptions to the Presumption in Favour of Bail
No Bail for Homicide or Rape if Previous Conviction
Murder
41
No Bail for Homicide or Rape if Previous Conviction
- the court may not grant bail to an accused who is charged with (or has been convicted of ) murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, rape or attempted rape, or certain other offences under the SOA 2003, if the accused has been convicted of any of these offences (or culpable homicide) in the past, unless it is of the opinion that there are exceptional circumstances which justify it.
- In a case where the previous conviction was for manslaughter, the restriction applies only if the accused received a custodial sentence for that offence.
- ‘Conviction’ is widely defined to include a finding that the defendant was not guilty by reason of insanity, or was found to have done the act or made the omission charged in a case where the defendant was unfit to plead.
- Previous convictions in other EU Member States are treated as being relevant previous convictions if the corresponding offences in the UK would be so treated.
42
Murder
-
- an accused who is charged with murder may not be granted bail unless the court is of the opinion that there is no significant risk that the accused will, if released on bail, commit an offence that would, or would be likely to, cause physical or mental injury to any other person.
- Again, the presumption in favour of bail is effectively reversed.
43
REFUSING BAIL TO AN ACCUSED CHARGED WITH AN INDICTABLE OFFENCE
- Part I of sch. 1 to the 1976 Act sets out the circumstances in which an accused may be refused bail if charged with (or awaiting sentence for) at least one offence that is triable on indictment and punishable with imprisonment (part IA applies where the offences(s) are imprisonable summary offences, and part II applies when none of the offences are imprisonable; see D7.35 et seq).
- An unconvicted accused charged with an offence which is imprisonable and triable on indictment need not be granted bail if one or more of the grounds for a remand in custody (listed in the BA 1976, sch. 1, part I, paras. 2 to 6A) is applicable. The first — and most commonly relied on — ground (para. 2) subdivides into three (see D7.13). As regards offenders convicted but remanded for reports, there is a further ground (para. 7) on which reliance may also be placed. The statutory grounds for refusing bail are as follows.
44
Risk of Absconding, Further Offences or Interference with Witnesses
TEST (‘Big three’ grounds for objecting to bail)
whether, if D is released on bail, there a
‘SUBSTANTIAL GROUNDS’ for believing that the D would either:
(a)fail to surrender to custody, or
(b)commit an offence while on bail, or
(c)interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct the course of justice, whether in relation to himself or any other person
45
Risk of Absconding, Further Offences or Interference with Witnesses
Standard of Proof
- court does not need to be satisfied that the consequences Standard of Proof
- The court must merely be satisfied that there are ‘substantial grounds for believing’ that they would occur.
46
Risk of Absconding, Further Offences or Interference with Witnesses
Standard of Proof
Although the question posed by para. 2 is whether substantial grounds exist for believing that a future event will occur and to that extent is a question of fact, it is not a question which can be answered according to the usual rules of evidence.
- Re Moles [1981] Crim LR 170 it was held that a police officer explaining the objections to bail was entitled to recount what he had been told by a potential witness about the threats the latter had received, with a view to showing that the granting of bail would lead to further interference with witnesses.
- In Mansfield Justices, ex parte Sharkey [1985] QB 613, Lord Lane CJ referred to Re Moles and said (at p. 626A), ‘there is no requirement for formal evidence to be given [at an application for bail] … It was for example sufficient for the facts to be related to the justices at second hand by a police officer.’
47
Grounds do NOT apply WHERE:
( ‘Big Three’ grounds for objection to bail)
(1) D is 18+; AND
(2) has not been convicted in present proceedings; AND
(3) no REAL PROSPECT of custodial sentence.
48
Considerations to the court when considering big 3
these factors are NOT grounds themselves, but help the court determine if the grounds are made out.
(a) the nature and seriousness of the offence and the probable method of dealing with the offender for it (see D7.18);
(b) the character, antecedents, associations and community ties of the accused (see D7.19 and D7.20);
(c) the accused’s ‘record’ for having answered bail in the past (see D7.21);
(d) the strength of the evidence against the accused (see D7.22); and
(e) if the court is satisfied that there are substantial grounds for believing that the accused would commit an offence while on bail, the risk that the accused may engage in conduct likely to cause physical or mental injury to anyone else (see D7.23).
49
(a) the nature and seriousness of the offence and the probable method of dealing with the offender for it (see D7.18);
- If offence is serious, then the accused will know that, if convicted, he is likely to receive a severe sentence and will therefore be tempted to abscond.
- The seriousness of offence not an automatic/conclusive reason for refusing
bail
- The statutory presumption in favour of bail continues to apply after conviction where there is an adjournment for the preparation of a pre-sentence report before sentence is passed. Even the inevitability of a custodial sentence is not itself an exception to the right to bail, unless it justifies a big 3 ground (eg
FTS).
50
(b) the character, antecedents, associations and community ties of the accused (see D7.19 and D7.20);
- This refers primarily to previous convictions. Previous convictions may make a custodial sentence more likely (especially if the accused, if convicted of the present offence, will be in breach of a suspended sentence of
imprisonment).
- Previous convictions under s6 BA 1976 (for FTS in answer to bail) are especially relevant.
- a person of previous good character is more likely to be trusted by the courts than one with a crim record.
51
b) associations and community ties of the accused (see D7.19 and D7.20);
- The word ‘associations’, generally taken to refer to : undesirable friends
with crim records.
- Examining the ‘community ties’, involves: looking at how easy it would be
for the accused to abscond and how much he has to lose by absconding.
- How long has he lived at his present address?
- Is he single or married?
- Does he have dependent children?
- Is he is employment?
- How long has he had his present job?
- Does he have a mortgage or protected tenancy?
- An accused of ‘no fixed abode’, or living in short-term accommodation, is not automatically debarred from bail, but the
ease with which he could disappear to another address is a factor to be
considered.
52
(c) the accused’s ‘record’ for having answered bail in the past (see D7.21);
- Considering the bail record of the accused requires the court to consider whether he has absconded in the past. If so = evidence of a risk he may do so again.
53
(d) the strength of the evidence against the accused (see D7.22); and
- This is relevant re risk of FTS one who knows there is a good chance of being acquitted is less likely to abscond than one who anticipates almost certain conviction.
- Can be argued that there is no point in the accused absconding if he is likely to
be acquitted anyway. Conversely, if the prosecution case is strong, he may
abscond.
- Is also relevant that: a remand in custody followed by acquittal creates a manifest, if sometimes unavoidable, injustice.
- In borderline cases, where the arguments against bail are strong but not
overwhelming, the court may prefer to run the risk of the accused absconding etc, rather than run the risk of his being acquitted after a long period in custody on remand.
54
(e) if the court is satisfied that there are substantial grounds for believing that the accused would commit an offence while on bail, the risk that the accused may engage in conduct likely to cause physical or mental injury to anyone else (see D7.23).
- Where court is satisfied there are substantial grounds for believing that
the accused would CFO while on bail, the court considers whether that
offence is likely to cause physical or mental injury to any other person.
55
To add in regards to considerations to the court when considering big 3
Para 9 [factors] concludes with the
words ‘as well as to any others [i.e. considerations] which appear to be relevant.’
- therefore, above list is not exhaustive
e‘Other’ factors might include:
o the fact that the accused has previously committed offences while on bail;
o the suggestion that potential prosecution witnesses have already received
threats and/or are known to the accused and could easily be contacted by
him if he were at liberty.
o any misuse of controlled drugs by D.
56
after the main 3 grounds above, the next most common & important trio of grounds that are widely applicable are:
(a) a remand in custody would be for the D’s own protection;
(b) the D is already serving a sentence in custody; and/or
(c) the court has insufficient information/time to deal with the issue of bail, and so remands in custody for a (short) period for the production of sufficient evidence
57
Own Protection
- Accused ‘need not’ be granted bail IF: court is satisfied should be kept in custody for his own protection.
- Eg where: the alleged offence has caused anger in the area it was committed; and there is risk of members of public exacting revenge
on person allegedly responsible.
- Where accused is a juvenile: bail may be refused if he should be kept in custody for his own welfare
58
Already in Custody
- ‘need not’ be granted bail if: is already serving a custodial sentence (whether imposed by a civilian court or Court Martial).
- Applies ONLY if: the accused is in custody pursuant to a sentence, NOT when he is in custody as a result of a remand in other
proceedings currently outstanding against him.
-Where an accused is certain to be in custody for the foreseeable future: the court may find it more convenient to grant what may be
regarded as ‘technical bail’: this avoids the restrictions on the periods for which remands in custody may be ordered, and the
consequent need to bring the accused back to court for further remand hearings.
- NB, re problems of accused attending court when already in custody: helped by use of live links.
59
Insufficient Time
- Accused ‘need not’ be granted bail IF: court satisfied that: owing to lack of time since the commencement of proceedings, it has not been practicable to obtain sufficient information for purposes of taking the
decision on bail.
- Court may then remand in custody (possibly for a shorter than usual period) for purposes of: enabling the necessary info to be discovered
- Eg, might apply where: police are not satisfied that the accused has given them his correct particulars, and think he may have previous convictions under another name; or if time is needed to check an address given by accused; or if inquiries are still in hand which may reveal the offence to be more serious than originally supposed and/or
that the accused has committed additional offences.
- This exception should be relied on sparingly: should not be used to justify dilatoriness on part of police/prosecution.
- NB: a remand in custody under para 5 does not amount to a decision not to grant bail: (because is basically delaying the decision in order to acquire more info) -> AND so does not restrict the right to make further applications for bail [[see ‘right to make
repeated bail applications’]]
60
Domestic Violence: Risk to an ‘Associated Person’
Accused ‘need not’ be granted bail IF: court is satisfied there are ‘substantial grounds for believing’ that he would, if released on bail,
commit an offence by engaging in conduct that would, or would be likely to, cause physical or mental injury to an associated person; or else cause such a person to fear such injury.
o ‘Associated person’ = as defined by Family Law Act 1996, s62.
61
Accused Already on Bail
Where offence is indictable (including either-way
Accused ‘need not’ be granted bail IF: it appears to court that accused was on bail in respect of another offence, when he committed the current offence.
However, does NOT apply where:
(1) the accused has attained the age of 18;
(2) AND has not been convicted of an offence in the current
proceedings;
(3) AND it appears to court there is no REAL PROSPECT of a custodial sentence in the proceedings.
62
Absconded in the Present Proceedings
Accused ‘need not’ be granted bail IF: having previously been released on bail in connection with the present proceedings, he has been arrested under s7 BA.
However, does NOT apply where:
(1) the accused has attained the age of 18;
(2) AND has not been convicted of an offence in the current
proceedings;
(3) AND it appears to court there is no REAL PROSPECT of a custodial sentence in the proceedings.
63
Bail in cases involving abuse of drugs (presumption of bail reversed)
An accused 18+ may not be granted bail UNLESS: there is no significant risk of his committing an offence whilst on bail, WHERE
(3 conditions):
(1) there is drug test evidence showing accused has a Class A drug in his body (by law of a lawful test)
AND
(2) either offence relates to Class A OR was caused/motivated by D misuse of Class A Drug:
* (a) he is charged with an offence under Misuse of Drugs Act
1971, s5(2) or (3), AND the offence relates to a specified Class
A drug;
* OR (b): the court is satisfied there are substantial grounds to
believe that the misuse of a Class A drug caused or contributed to the offence he is charged with
* OR that offence was motivated wholly or partly by his intended misuse of a Class A drug;
AND
(3): the person does not agree to undergo an assessment (carried out by a suitably qualified person) of whether he is dependent upon, or
has a propensity to misuse, any Class A drugs;
OR has undergone such an assessment but does not agree to participate in any relevant follow-up which has been offered.
64
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Imprisonable Summary Offences (including Crim Damage value £5k or less (≤))
(1) Big 3 IF following s7 Bail Act arrest: where accused has:
(1) been arrested under s7 BA (absconding/breach of bail conditions); AND
(2) substantial grounds for believing FTS, CFO or interfere with witnesses/obstruct
course of justice.
o UNLESS no real prospect of custodial sentence (AND is 18 AND
has not been convicted in present proceedings).
65
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Imprisonable Summary Offences (including Crim Damage value £5k or less (≤))
Risk of FTS if previous FTS: where:
(1)
(1) accused has previously been granted bail and failed to surrender in these
proceedings; AND
(2) court believes, if released on bail, would fail to surrender to custody.
o UNLESS no real prospect of custodial sentence (AND is 18 AND
has not been convicted in present proceedings).
66
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Imprisonable Summary Offences (including Crim Damage value £5k or less (≤))
Risk of CFO IF accused was on bail at date of current alleged offence:
(2)
where (1) accused was on bail at date of current alleged offence; AND
(2) court satisfied that substantial grounds for believing would commit an
offence if released.
o UNLESS no real prospect of custodial sentence (AND is 18 AND
has not been convicted in present proceedings).
67
Big 3 as applicable to summary offences, are only activated by a trigger event (a s7 arrest
The logic: for offences of lesser seriousness, it is broadly assumed that a D would not risk FTS/CFO/ interfering with witnesses.
However, if his behaviour on bail suggests otherwise and he breaches a condition of bail (or has a history of this), then the grounds for objection become eligible grounds to remand him in custody.
EXAMPLE:
* If X is charged with crim damage by way of graffiti with a low value
of damage done, the max penalty is 3 months imprisonment. None of
the ‘big 3’ objections are initially available in the case, and, if there
are no other grounds applicable in the case, he will be granted bail.
* If X breaches a condition of bail, eg the curfew condition, then he
can be arrested under s7 Bail Act, and brought to court. At this
point in proceedings, objection to his bail can now based on the ‘big
three’ ground
68
The BA 1976, sch. 1, part IA, para. 1A, provides that para. 2 (failure to surrender to custody), para. 3 (committing offences while on bail) and para. 7 (accused arrested under s. 7) do not apply where the accused has attained the age of 18, and has not been convicted of an offence in the proceedings, and it appears to the court that there is ‘no real prospect that the defendant will be sentenced to a custodial sentence in the proceedings’.
69
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Imprisonable Summary Offences (including Crim Damage value £5k or less (≤))
If Summary Only Imprisonable:
i. Does D have previous FTS?
ii. Is D currently on bail in other proceedings?
iii. Has D been released on bail but then been arrested? S7 BA 75 (breach bail cond)
iv. Could any of the technical 3 apply on the facts?
v. Is this a DV case?
70
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Imprisonable Summary Offences (including Crim Damage value £5k or less (≤))
(2) The 3 technical grounds
o (1) Own protection
o (2) Already serving custodial sentence
o (3) Insufficient info/time
71
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Imprisonable Summary Offences (including Crim Damage value £5k or less (≤))
(3) If already on bail on date of current offence, SGFB D would CFO unless NRPCS
72
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Imprisonable Summary Offences (including Crim Damage value £5k or less (≤))
(4) If arrested under S7 BA and SGFB D would, FTS, CFO, IWW unless NRPCS
73
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Imprisonable Summary Offences (including Crim Damage value £5k or less (≤))
(5) DV – SGFB D, if released on bail, likely to CFO cause physical or mental injury
to an associated person; or cause such a person to fear physical/mental injury
74
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Summary Non-Imprisonable Offences
i. Has D been convicted in the proceedings?
ii. Does D have previous FTS
iii. Has D been arrsed under S7 BA
iv. Is this a DV case?
v. Is D already in custody?
75
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Summary Non-Imprisonable Offences
(1) Big 3 IF:
(1) convicted in the current case (or is under 18) AND
(2) following s7 Bail Act arrest. (& substantial grounds for believing...big 3)
a) Risk of FTS IF:
(1) Convicted in current proceedings (or is under 18) AND
(2) Previous FTS when previously having been granted bail &
(3) Would FTS
76
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Summary Non-Imprisonable Offences
2 of the Technical Grounds:
o Own Protection
o Already serving a custodial sentence
77
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Summary Non-Imprisonable Offences
(3) S7 arrest (absconding/breach of bail) + Associated person protection ground: i.e.
where:
(1) accused has been arrested under s7; AND
(2) court satisfied substantial grounds for believing would commit an offence
that would/would be likely to cause physical/mental injury to an associated
person or cause such a person to fear such injury.
78
GROUNDS for refusing bail for Summary Non-Imprisonable Offences
It should be noted that the grounds of ‘risk of absconding etc.’ and ‘insufficient time’ for refusing bail to someone charged with imprisonable offences do not apply where the offences are non-imprisonable.
79
Where the court grants ‘unconditional’ bail, the accused has simply to surrender to custody (i.e. attend court) at the date and time specified (s. 3(1)). However, the court may impose a wide range of additional requirements by granting bail subject to specific conditions, known as ‘conditional bail’ (s. 3(6)).
80
CONDITIONS OF BAIL
Where Conditions may imposed: if court thinks they are ‘NECESSARY’ to secure
that the accused:
(a) surrenders to custody (FTS);
(b) does not commit an offence on bail (CFO);
(c) does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct course of justice
(d) for his own protection (or, if a juvenile, for his own ‘welfare or
interests’).
81
Duty to Surrender to Custody
A person granted bail in crim proceedings under a duty to surrender to custody (of
the court the accused has been bailed to attend).
* The Date & Place of surrender is fixed when bail is granted,
- EXCEPT: when sent to Crown Court for trial or sentence, obligation is to surrender on the day his case comes up for hearing, if it is not possible to notify him of the hearing date at the time the case is sent to Crown court.
− The fixed date may be varied to a later date
82
An accused granted bail may not be bailed on his own recognizance (in other words, an accused may not act as his or her own surety).
However, accused may be required:
i. to provide other ppl to stand surety for him;
OR
o Surety = person who agrees to pay the court a specified sum of money (a recognizance) if the defendant fails to attend court
ii. to give security for his own surrender to custody.
o Security = is a sum of money or other valuables that is deposited with the court to ensure a defendant surrenders to
custody
83
Where Conditions may imposed: if court thinks they are ‘NECESSARY’ to secure
that the accused:.
(a) surrenders to custody (FTS);
(b) does not commit an offence on bail (CFO);
(c) does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct course of justice
(d) for his own protection (or, if a juvenile, for his own ‘welfare or
interests’)
(e) makes himself available for the making of inquiries or a report to assist in sentencing [[may be imposed only if appears to be necessary to do so for the purpose of enabling inquiries/a report to be made]].
(f) to secure that he attends an interview with a legal rep (nearly always a solicitor).
84
Re the test to apply for whether to impose a condition: the court should ask ‘is this
condition necessary’ regarding one of these:
(a) surrenders to custody (FTS);
(b) does not commit an offence on bail (CFO);
(c) does not interfere with witnesses or otherwise obstruct course of justice
(d) for his own protection (or, if a juvenile, for his own ‘welfare or
interests’)
(e) makes himself available for the making of inquiries or a report to assist in sentencing [[may be imposed only if appears to be necessary to do so for the purpose of enabling inquiries/a report to be made]].
(f) to secure that he attends an interview with a legal rep (nearly always a solicitor).
- They are not obliged to have ‘substantial grounds’ (as for the big 3 bail
grounds).
-It is enough to perceive a ‘real and not a fanciful risk’. In order to impose
a condition, it is enough for court to perceive a ‘real risk’, doesn’t need to be a substantial risk.
85
A prosecutor who wants court to impose a condition must: specify the condition &
explain its purpose
Court can impose ‘such conditions as appear necessary’, meaning technically that
there is no limit to the conditions a court could impose. So there is no definitive list,
any condition ‘necessary’ can be imposed
86
Commonly imposed conditions include:
(a) a condition of residence, often expressed as a condition that the accused is to live and sleep at a specified address;
(b) a condition that the accused is to notify any changes of address to the police;
(c) a condition of reporting (whether daily, weekly or at other intervals) to a local police station;
(d) a curfew (i.e. the accused must be at a specified address between certain hours);
(e) a condition that the accused is not to enter a certain area or building or go within a specified distance of a certain address;
(f) a condition that the accused is not to contact (whether directly or indirectly) the victim of the alleged offence and/or any other probable prosecution witness; and #
(g) a condition that the accused’s passport must be surrendered to the police (sometimes with an additional restriction to prevent the accused from applying for travel documents).
Conditions (a), (b), (c) and (g) are particularly relevant to reducing the risk of absconding.
Conditions (d) and (e) are designed to prevent the commission of offences when on bail.
Conditions (e) and (f ) may be imposed to minimise the risk of interference with witnesses.
Conditions (e) and (f ) may be imposed to minimise the risk of interference with witnesses.
87
Bail condition
(a) Residence at a given address
A special form of residential condition: accused is to reside at a bail hostel/probation hostel (and must comply with the rules of hostel).
88
- A curfew may be appropriate where the offence with which the accused is charged was allegedly committed at night;
- a geographical restriction is useful if the offence was one of violence committed at a certain address
89
Electronic Monitoring
- Electronic monitoring (colloquially known as ‘tagging’) is available as a condition of bail under the BA 1976, s. 3(6ZAA). This condition is often combined with a curfew condition.
90
Surety
- a surety can be sought only for the purpose of securing surrender to custody
- (the offer of money made by someone with influence over the D to secure the D’s return to court
- A PERSON CANNOT STAND AS SURETY FOR HIMSELF!!
-
91
Security
- (the D himself, or someone on his behalf, putting up money to be forfeited if he does not answer his bail and attend court
- security may be required as a condition of bail only if it is considered necessary to prevent absconding
- It is permissible for a 3rd party to make available an asset to an accused
to enable him to give it as security for his release.
- However, it is the accused who gives the security; so the arrangements the accused might make with those who helped him put up the security are not a matter for the court. No obligation for the 3rd party to be notified before the security is forfeited on the accused’s non-attendance.
- where the person absconds -> court may order forfeiture of the security
unless there is ‘reasonable cause’ for failure to surrender .
92
Applications to Vary the Conditions of Bail
Which court should the application be made to?
The application should be made to the court which granted bail (or to the Crown Court if accused has been sent there for trial/sentence)
93
Applications to Vary the Conditions of Bail
Prosecution making this application?
the prosecution may make a similar application either for:
a) existing conditions to be varied, OR
b) for conditions to be imposed (where court originally granted
unconditional bail).
94
Applications to Vary the Conditions of Bail
Where a party intends to apply for a variation of conditions: he must give advance notice to the court and the other party, “explaining what is sought and why”
- the application must be served not less than two business days before any hearing in the case at which the applicant wants the court to consider it, if such a hearing is already due.
- If the variation is agreed by the parties = The court may determine an application to vary a condition without a hearing.
- If there is to be a hearing: it should take place no later than the FIFTH BUSINESS DAY after the application was served.
95
Breach of bail conditions
Breach of any condition -> may result in:
(1) the accused being arrested without warrant by a constable (s7(3) BA); AND
- Police officers allowed to arrest for those in breach or about to be in breach –
don’t have to wait until D breaches bail
(2) his bail being withdrawn.
96
Breaching a condition of bail is not automatically committing an offence – no offence
- May trigger new grounds to refuse bail-
- Only bail breach = criminal offence is NOT SURRENDING TO CUSTODY which is punishable by:
i. 3 months imprisonment in MC
ii. 12 months imprisonment CC
97
Right to Make Repeated Argued Bail Applications
A D who is having a trial in the magistrates’ court: can have:
a) TWO ATTEMPTS at getting bail at the m’ court; and
b) ONE ATTEMPT on appeal to the Crown Court.
98
Right to Make Repeated Argued Bail Applications
Where accused is remanded in custody =
He may make a fully argued application at the next hearing, regardless of whether he is repeating arguments already placed before the previous bench.
99
Can repeat same bail application at the next hearing, which will take place within 8 clear days (unless accused consents to being remanded in his absence)
[[at 2nd hearing, if accused has already been remanded in custody on at least 1
previous occasion, can subsequently be remanded in for up to 28 days before
next hearing]].
NB: presence at the second appearance may be via video link (counts as being
‘present in the courtroom’)
100
If the second argued application for bail fails =
a further application may only
be presented if there are fresh arguments/considerations to put before court:
- at subsequent hearings m’ court need not hear previous arguments of fact/law, only fresh arguments (in m’ court, where accused is remanded in custody, next hearing must be every 28 days or fewer)
= the court ‘need not hear arguments as to fact or law which it has heard previously’.
- (Although at each hearing the court should nominally consider whether he ought to remain in custody.)
- So effectively the magistrates can treat the finding of the previous bench (that there were grounds for refusing bail) as a form of res iudicata [[‘a matter judged’]].
- They may therefore refuse to hear argument in favour of bail, need only satisfy themselves that the accused has exhausted the argued bail applications to which he is entitled as of right and there has been no
material change of circumstances since the last argued application to entitle him to reopen the matter.
101
So, if refused bail again at second hearing, accused must either:
(a) appeal to Crown court re the decision against granting him bail’; OR
(b) find fresh arguments to make (eg finding a surety he didn’t have available
before)
102
Certificates of Full Argument
Where a MC
(1) adjourns a case AND
(2) remands the accused in custody after hearing a fully argued bail app:
(A) - the court must issue a certificate confirming that full argument was heard if either the court has not previously heard full argument on a bail application made by the accused in the proceedings; OR
(B)it has previously heard such argument but is satisfied that there has been a change in circumstances or that new considerations have been placed before it
Where court heard a subsequently application on basis of (b): the certificate
must state what the change of circumstances/new considerations was.
103
Certificate of full argument
- The accused must be given a copy of the certificate.
104
Certificate of full argument
The right to apply to Crown Court for bail is dependent on issue of the certificate
NB: an adjournment during a summary trial includes an adjournment for reports after conviction –so the obligation to issue a certificate may arise if the accused is remanded in custody at that stage.
Further, the obligation to issue a certificate also applies where bail is refused on an
adjournment for medical reports.
105
OPTIONS OPEN TO AN ACCUSED REMANDED IN CUSTODY OR ON CONDITIONAL BAIL BY MAGISTRATES
- An accused who has been refused bail by a magistrates’ court may apply for bail to the Crown Court.
- An appeal can also be made against a decision of a magistrates’ court to impose conditions on bail.
106
CC – Bail Application
Applies when the accused wants to apply to the Crown Court for bail after bail has been withheld by a magistrates’ court or to appeal to the Crown Court after a magistrates’ court has refused an application by the accused
Can apply for bail to Crown Court either:
1. MC refused bail
2. MC refused an application to vary/remove conditions
107
CC – Bail Application
Notice of Appeal
Written notice of intention to make the application must be given to:
A) MC; AND
B) CC; AND
C) PROSECUTION
as soon as reasonably practicable after the decision of the magistrates’ court
108
CC – Bail Application
Appeal
The notice must:
- explain why bail should not be withheld, or why the condition l should be varied
- should identify any further information or legal argument that has become available since the decision of the magistrates’ court; AND
- where it is an application for bail, should attach a copy of the certificate that the magistrates heard full argument as to bail
-
109
CC – Bail Application
Notice of Appeal
If Prosecution opposes the application then he must:
a) Notify:
- the CC; and
- the accused at once
b) serve notice of the reasons for opposing
110
CC – Bail Application
Notice of Appeal
The appeal/application should be heard
no later than the BUSINESS DAY AFTER notice was served (Unless the Crown Court directs otherwise) (i.e. 24 hours notice needed)
111
CC – Bail Application
HEARING
- may be heard in public OR private (often heard in chambers)
- heard by a circuit judge or recorder.
(1) counsel for prosecution summarising the objections to bail;
(2) counsel for applicant responding to those objections.
112
CC – Bail Application
If bail is granted to an accused who was refused it by magistrates = the Crown Court may direct him to appear ‘at a time and place which the magistrates’ court could have directed’; and the recognizance of any surety
shall be conditioned accordingly.
Any sureties required by the Crown Court may enter into their recognizances before, inter alia:
a) an officer of the Crown Court;
b) a police officer (who is EITHER in charge of a police station; OR of rank of inspector or above);
b) or the governor of the prison where accused is presently detained.
113
CC – Bail Application
* For a D whose trial will be heard in the CC he gets:
a) ONE ATTEMPT at bail at First Hearing in MC;
b) ONE ATTEMPT as right of appeal at the CC
114
If one application for bail has already been made to Crown Court, a further argued
application may not be presented unless
there are FRESH ARGUMENT or
considerations to put before the court.
= [SO ONLY GETS 1 hearing in Crown Court, unless new arguments]].
115
Prosecution right of appeal against decision to grant bail
the prosecution the right to appeal:
(1) Where m’ court grants bail: Prosecution right to appeal to Crown Court against a decision by m’ court to grant bail.
(2) Where Crown Court grants bail: Prosecution right to appeal to High Court when Court grants
bail (other than in the context of an appeal against the grant of bail by a m’ court).
116
Prosecution right of appeal against decision to grant bail
the prosecution the right to appeal - this right is limited to cases where:
a) the accused is charged with, or convicted of, an offence which is (or would be in the case of an adult) punishable by imprisonment; and
b) the prosecution is conducted by or on behalf of the DPP (this includes prosecutions conducted by the CPS), or by a prosecutor specified in the schedule to the Bail (Amendment) Act 1993 (Prescription of Prosecuting Authorities) Order 1994 (SI 1994 No. 1438), which includes the SFO; the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy; and the Department for Work and Pensions; and a universal service provider within the meaning of the Postal Services Act 2011; and
c) before bail was granted, the prosecution made representations that bail should not be granted.
117
The Procedure for the Prosecution to Appeal (Grant Bail)
1. The Prosecution must have opposed bail originally
2. The offence must be punishable by Imprisonment
3. The Prosecution indicates orally at the conclusion of the hearing in which bail is
granted, and before the accused is released from custody, that they will appeal (D
is then held in custody)
- NB: requirement was satisfied where notice was given to the justices clerk about 5 mins after the court rose & before the accused has been released from custody; delay of 5 mins, especially when accused had not yet been released from custody, was ok).
= And notice can properly be given to the justices’ clerk = so is not necessary that the justices should themselves be in court.
4. The intention to appeal is confirmed in writing and served within two hours on:
a) Court
b) Defence/accused
- Otherwise the appeal is deemed disposed of and accused will be released on bail on the terms granted by m’ court.
- NB: has been held that a delay of 3 mins late beyond the 2 hours, where delay was not the fault of the prosecution and did not cause
accused any prejudice, was ok, did not defeat the prosecution appeal.
5. Appeal is heard within 48 hours/2 working days – excluding weekends = Appeal is heard by CC judge
118
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH BAIL
Where an accused who has been granted bail in criminal proceedings fails to comply with the obligations imposed thereby, two main questions arise:
1) how the court should ensure that the accused will attend court for the remaining stages of the proceedings;
2) how the accused (and any sureties) will be dealt with in consequence of the breach of bail
119
Powers of the Court when a Bailed Accused Fails to Appear
- When a person who is on bail fails to surrender to custody in answer to bail, the court has a number of options.
(1) Court may issue a warrant for his arrest (‘bench warrant’) under s7(1) BA 1976.
- under s6, absconding is a criminal offence
- Where the accused fails to appear, a bench warrant will normally be issued.
-A justices’ CLERK can issue a warrant of arrest for FTS, whether or not endorsed for bail (where there is no objection on behalf of the accused).
- However, at the court’s discretion, the warrant may be ‘backed for bail’, either with or without a requirement for sureties.
- The applies whatever court he was bailed to attend; and regardless of whether bail was granted by the custody officer at police station or by the court itself at an earlier hearing.
o The usual form of warrant simply orders the arrest of the accused and that
he be brought to court
120
Powers of the Court when a Bailed Accused Fails to Appear
- When a person who is on bail fails to surrender to custody in answer to bail, the court has a number of options.
(2) Instead of issuing a warrant (extend bail/take no further action)
(a) MC may adjourn and extend the accused’s bail:
(b) Crown Court, if appropriate, may simply order that the case be “stood out of the list” and take no further action in respect of the
accused (who will remain under an obligation to attend whenever the case is next listed).
- Such a course of action is appropriate only where: the court is satisfied that there is a ‘good reason’ for the accused’s non- attendance (eg a doctor’s certificate indicating he is unfit to attend).
121
Powers of the Court when a Bailed Accused Fails to Appear
- When a person who is on bail fails to surrender to custody in answer to bail, the court has a number of options.
(3) It may be possible to proceed in the absence of the accused
o EWO:
(a) Previous consent in person; OR
(b) Good reason & consent through legal rep
- MC may try the case in absence of accused the case:
(a) only with the consent of the accused AND
(b) that consent has to be given at a hearing at which the accused is present
UNLESS (court can proceed, in either-way offence, in absence of accused without accused giving consent in person where):
(a) the court is satisfied there is ‘a good reason’ for the absence of the accused; AND
(b) accused is represented by a lawyer who consents to summary trial on his behalf
122
Breach of Bail Conditions
where an accused has been bailed to attend a court, a police officer may arrest the accused without warrant prior to the surrender date if:
(a) the officer has reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not likely to surrender to custody; or
(b) the officer has reasonable grounds for believing that the accused has broken, or is likely to break, any condition of bail; or
(c) a surety has given written notice to the police that the person bailed is unlikely to surrender to custody and for that reason the surety wishes to be relieved of any obligations.
123
Breach of Bail Conditions
Following arrest: the person arrested must be brought before a magistrate as soon as practicable, and, in any event, within 24 hours (excluding Sundays) .
- Case law emphasis importance of dealing with accused within 24 hours; is a strict time-limit
− It follows that: the justice is required to complete his investigation and decision-making within the 24-hr period.
IF the justice fails to do so the continued custody of the accused becomes unlawful from the moment the 24-hr period was expired.
− If the justice purports to remand the accused in custody after that time: the order is ultra vires and unlawful.
− Person arrested is brought before a single justice; the justice need not be sitting in a courtroom.
124
Procedure where the Accused is Brought before the Court under s. 7
where the accused is arrested under s7(3) within 24 hours of the time appointed for him to surrender to custody =
He must be brought before the
court at which he was to have surrendered to custody
125
Procedure where accused is brought before m’ court s7(3) [[breach of bail conditions]]
STAGE 1
justice must determine whether there has been a breach of bail condition/is likely to be a breach/whether accused is likely to FTS:
If NO = must grant him bail on the same conditions (if any) as were
originally imposed
126
Procedure where accused is brought before m’ court s7(3) [[breach of bail conditions]]
STAGE 2
IF YES TO STAGE 1 =
must decide whether to grant bail again….
Options are:
1. the magistrate may remand him in custody (s7(5)).
− UNLESS (cannot remand in custody if): accused age over 18
& not yet convicted in present proceedings & no real prospect of a custodial sentence = then cannot remand in custody.
2. Alternatively, he may grant him bail subject to different conditions (normally more onerous conditions than already existed).
127
Procedure where accused is brought before m’ court s7(3) [[breach of bail conditions]]
There is no defence of ‘reasonable excuse’ for failing to comply with bail conditions
- (though any ‘reasonable excuse’ may be a factor in stage 2, when magistrate
is deciding whether or not to grant bail again).
- It is the second stage where any reasons for breach are considered.
128
Nature of a s. 7
- in considering whether the accused has broken any condition of bail
- it was confirmed that there is no need for the court to hear evidence; instead it can base its decision on representations from the prosecution and the defence.
129
Failure to Surrender
- creates the offence of absconding
- a person who has been released on bail and who fails, without reasonable cause, to surrender to custody, is guilty of an offence
130
Failure to Surrender
TWO offences under s6:
(1)FTS without reasonable excuse
- Burden of showing defence of ‘reasonable cause’ is on the accused
(2) After FTS with reasonable cause, is an offence to then fail to surrender as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter [s6(2))]].
- It follows that: where an accused has a reasonable excuse for failing to attend court,
he must surrender to custody as soon as reasonably practicable after that excuse
ceases to apply
131
Procedure for prosecuting offences under s6 Bail Act
S6 offence is punishable EITHER:
(a) on summary conviction or
(b) as if it were a criminal contempt of court.
132
Procedure for prosecuting offences under s6 Bail Act
- s6(5) does not have the effect of converting an offence under the Act into an contempt of court. So judge cannot deal with the matter in same way as an ordinary contempt of court.
133
Procedure for prosecuting offences under s6 Bail Act
The procedure to be followed:
A) An accused who has absconded after being granted bail by a court should normally be brought, as soon as appropriate after arrest, before the court at which the proceedings in respect of which bail was granted are to be heard
B) There is no requirement to apply for a summons or to issue a written charge and requisition.
C) It is regarded as more appropriate that the court itself should initiate the proceedings by its own motion, although the prosecutor may invite the court to take proceedings
D) Where the court initiates proceedings (with or without an invitation from the prosecutor), the prosecutor is expected to assist the court, for example by cross-examining the accused
134
Procedure for prosecuting offences under s6 Bail Act
The procedure to be followed:
- In practice, many magistrates’ courts informally ask absconders or their legal representative the reason for the non-appearance
- If the explanation seems prima facie satisfactory, the bench indicates that no further action is necessary;
- otherwise the charge is put to the accused.
-
