H. M. Advocate v Mannion
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 09 February 1961 |
| Docket Number | No. 16. |
| Date | 09 February 1961 |
| Court | High Court of Justiciary |
HIGH COURT.
Lord Justice-Clerk.
Crime—Attempting to defeat the ends of justice—Knowingly avoiding giving evidence for the Crown—Relevancy of indictment—Power of Court to deal with new crime.
An indictment charged two panels that they "did form a criminal purpose to hinder and frustrate the course of justice, in pursuance of which you, knowing that you were required to give evidence for the prosecution in the trial of Samuel M'Kay … did leave your said house and go into hiding somewhere to the prosecutor unknown for the purpose of avoiding giving evidence … with intent that your evidence would not be available to the prosecution and with intent to hinder and frustrate the course of justice … and you did attempt to defeat the ends of justice."
At the diet of trial the Court allowed pleas of not guilty to be withdrawn and a plea to the relevancy of the indictment to be stated on behalf of the panels.
Held by the Lord Justice-Clerk (Thomson) that, as it clearly narrated the evil intention of the accused to avoid being called upon to give evidence, the indictment was relevant.
Hugh Kelly Mannion And Frances Egan or Mannion were charged on the following indictment:—"That between 17th August and 7th September 1960, both dates inclusive, in the house occupied by you at 22/7 Muirhouse Medway, Edinburgh, or elsewhere in Scotland to the Prosecutor unknown, you did form a criminal purpose to hinder and frustrate the course of justice, in pursuance of which you, knowing that you were required to give evidence for the prosecution in the trial of Samuel M'Kay, now a prisoner in the Prison of Aberdeen, at a sitting of the High Court of Justiciary, Glasgow, commencing on 13th September 1960, on charges of attempting to open a lockfast place and theft by opening a lockfast place, did leave your said house and go into hiding somewhere to the Prosecutor unknown for the purpose of avoiding giving evidence as aforesaid, and the diet of said trial having been deserted pro loco et tempore, and a new diet appointed for trial in said High Court on 7th November 1960, you, again knowing that you were required to give evidence as aforesaid, continued to hide for the purpose aforesaid until said Samuel M'Kay had been tried in said High Court, all with intent that your evidence would not be available to the prosecution and with intent to hinder and frustrate the course of justice, and you remained in hiding until 6th December 1960, when...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Her Majesty's Advocate V. Mark Harris
...1986 SCCR 593; Carney v HM Advocate 1995 JC 11; Johnstone v Lees 1994 SCCR 687; Dalton v HM Advocate 1951 JC 76; HM Advocate v Mannion 1961 JC 79). As regards charge (12), the course of justice began when the speeding offence was deliberately committed, resulting in a notice of intended pro......
-
HM Advocate v Harris (No 2) [Appeal Court, High Court of Justiciary]
...of the charges. The Crown sought recall of the sheriff's decision by bill of advocation. Cases referred to: Advocate (HM) v MannionSCUNK 1961 JC 79; [1962] Crim LR 775 Advocate (HM) v MartinSC 1956 JC 1; 1956 SLT 193 Advocate (HM) v Rae and Little (1845) 2 Brown 476 Allison v HM AdvocateUNK......
-
HM Advocate v Turner
...to: Advocate (HM) v Harris (No 2) [2010] HCJAC 102; 2011 JC 125; 2010 SCCR 931; 2011 SCL 54; 2010 GWD 35-724 Advocate (HM) v Mannion 1961 JC 79; [1962] Crim LR 775 Dalton v HM Advocate 1951 JC 76; 1951 SLT 294 Davidson v HM Advocate 1990 SCCR 699 Dean v Stewart 1980 SLT (Notes) 85 Hanley v ......