Jury trial procedure. Unrepresented defendants Flashcards
Treatment by Court of Unrepresented Accused
If an accused is not legally represented, the court will, as a matter of practice, seek to give the accused such assistance in conducting his or her defence as may seem appropriate. The Crown Court Compendium, ch. 3–5, includes reference to a defendant providing assistance to the jury as to the issues in the case after the prosecution.
Alternatively, where the accused dismisses counsel and/or solicitors during the course of the trial (or they withdraw during trial) and the accused remains entitled to public funding, the judge may grant an adjournment for the accused to be represented though there is no requirement that the court must do so.
Accused’s Right to Give or Call Evidence
The accused should always be told by the court at the end of the prosecution case of the right to give evidence in person, to call witnesses in his or her defence (whether or not the accused goes into the witness-box), or to stay silent and call no evidence. Failure to give the accused this information may lead to any conviction being quashed (Carter).
It is particularly important that an unrepresented accused should be informed of the inferences which may be drawn from a failure to give evidence.
The court is obliged to address the accused, pursuant to CrimPD 6.7.5 in the following terms:
Now is your chance to give evidence if you choose to do so. If you do give evidence it will be on oath [or affirmation], and you will be cross examined like any other witness. If you do not give evidence the jury may hold it against you. If you do give evidence but refuse without good reason to answer the questions the jury may, as I have just explained, hold that against you. Do you now intend to give evidence?
Restrictions on the Accused
CrimPR 25.11(6) recognises the role of the trial judge in asking questions of witnesses on behalf of an unrepresented defendant in that defendant’s interests. Beyond that, there are limitations on what such a defendant can do personally.
certain restrictions have applied. Unrepresented defendants are prohibited from cross-examining complainants and child witnesses in trials for certain offences. The courts also have the power to prohibit cross-examination of witnesses by unrepresented defendants if satisfied that the circumstances of the witness and the case merit it, and that a prohibition would not be contrary to the interests of justice. There are provisions for the appointment of representatives to conduct cross-examinations on behalf of unrepresented defendants.
By way of guidance as to the role of such a representative, in Abbas v CPS the Divisional Court said that a s. 38 advocate did not have a free-ranging remit to conduct the trial on D’s behalf. Rather the advocate was under a statutory duty to be in a position to properly conduct a cross-examination, which might include a pre-trial application to admit bad character evidence or for disclosure, if relevant to the cross-examination. The important point was that s. 38 advocates must ensure that their duties accorded with the words of the statute.
