Child Witnesses: Do Special Measures Directions Prejudice the Accused's Right to a Fair Hearing?—R v Camberwell Green Youth Court, Ex P. D; R v Camberwell Green Youth Court, Ex P. G
| DOI | 10.1350/ijep.2005.9.4.291 |
| Author | Jonathan Doak |
| Published date | 01 December 2005 |
| Date | 01 December 2005 |
| Subject Matter | Case Note |
THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE & PROOF 291
CASE NOTE
T
Child witnesses: Do special measures
directions prejudice the accused’s right
to a fair hearing?—
R
v
Camberwell
Green Youth Court, ex p. D
;
R
v
Camberwell Green Youth Court, ex p. G
By Jonathan Doak*
Department of Law, University of Sheffield
he Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 introduced a range of
special measures aimed at assisting vulnerable and intimidated witnesses
in court. Section 21(5) of the Act stipulates a mandatory presumption that,
save in the most exceptional circumstances, witnesses under the age of 17 in cases
concerning sexual or violent offences, must be examined in chief through a video
recording and cross-examined through a live television link. In R v Camberwell Green
Youth Court, ex p. D; R v Camberwell Green Youth Court, ex p. G,1
it was argued before the
House of Lords that the provision was incompatible with the accused’s right to a fair
trial under Article 6 of the European Convention. In dismissing the appeal, their
Lordships unanimously held that this presumption did not breach the defendants’
right to a fair trial, and that the legislation contained sufficient safeguards to prevent
any unfairness arising.
The facts
The defendants D and G, both under 16, appeared before Camberwell Green Youth
Court charged with robbery. It was alleged that D had robbed a boy aged 13 years of
(2005) 9 E&P 291–295
* Email: J.Doak@sheffield.ac.uk.
1 [2005] UKHL 4, [2005] 2 Cr App R 1.
To continue reading
Request your trial