SGS 3 Flashcards
What is the additional element of ABH?
Defendant intentionally or recklessly
batters or assault the victim
causing
actual bodily harm
What are the three categories of offensive weapons under s.1(4)?
offensive per se: knives knuckledusters etc.
Adapted e.g. broken bottle
Intention to cause injury e.g. tool carried by tradesman (if no intention here, no need to argue any reasonable excuse)
Extra detail for PoW?
‘knowingly’ in his possession.
What is an extra detail in relation to s.34?
The suspect must give evidence at their trial for s.34 to apply. For ss.36 and 37 to apply failure to provide an explanation will attract adverse inferences regardless of whether the defendant does give evidence.
If there has been insufficient disclosure what would your advice be?
This would justify the option of not answering questions.
If sufficient - advise suspect about strength of evidence against him.
What should you do in the ‘evidence section’?
set out elements of offence
analyse prosecution evidence on the elements
conclude whether the evidence is strong or weak.
What are the Argent factors?
Age, sobriety, health, experience, mental capacity.
What should you discuss in the defence section?
Has the suspect got one?
What facts will they later rely on?
Advantages of remaining silent?
doesn’t add to strength of prosecution case.
Avoids risk of self-incrimination.
Avoids risk that suspect’s story will not stand up to scrutiny.
Disadvantages of remaining silent?
adverse inferences could be drawn.
Advantages of answering questions?
- Avoids adverse inferences
- Co-operation may be raised as a mitigation point.
Disadvantages of answering questions?
- May give a damaging account,
- Answers can be used as evidence against the suspect.
- Loss of control over how much info is supplied to police
Advantages of prepared statement?
- Suspect control info supplied to police
- Protected from self-incrimination
- Doesn’t give a poor / damaging account.
Disadvantages of prepared statement?
- R v Knight: Submitting an incomplete prepared statement can lead to an adverse inference under s.34 CJPOA if defendant later relies on facts omitted from the statement in his defence at trial which he could reasonably have been expected to mention in his interview.
Why would one use a prepared statement?
raises facts of defence while avoiding stress of interview and controls evidence supplied to police / prosecution.
Why would one answer questions?
if disclosure has been sufficient to suggest the CPS will prosecute and the suspect is able to put forward his defence
Legal advice to remain silent?
inferences can still be drawn (R v Hoare and Pierce)
If a good defence but chose the remain silent on advice, no inference.
If ‘hid behind’ legal advice, draw inference.
To decide which, waive legal privilege, but then may be cross examined on all information given in consultation.
R v Howell?
Absence of a written statement from the complainant is not necessarily a good reason for silence and does not prevent inference being drawn
Put in adverse inference section
s.37 and 36 extras?
X was arrested at scene, now in police detention and has been offered legal advice. If he fails to account for item / presence an adverse inference may be drawn.
