HM Advocate v Turner
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Lord Turnbull |
| Judgment Date | 17 January 2020 |
| Court | High Court of Justiciary |
| Docket Number | No 9 |
[2020] HCJ 12
Lord Turnbull
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 HM Advocate [2018] HCJAC 29; 2018 JC 169; 2018 SCCR 153; 2018 GWD 19-242
Waddell v MacPhail 1986 SCCR 593
Watson v HM Advocate 1993 SCCR 875
Gordon, GH, The Criminal Law of Scotland (4th Chalmers and Leverick ed, W Green, Edinburgh, 2017), vol 2, p 704, fn 120
Ross, JM, “Offences Against the Administration of Justice” in Stair Memorial Encyclopaedia: The Laws of Scotland (Butterworths/Law Society of Scotland, Edinburgh, 1995), vol 7, para 496, fn 5
Justiciary — Crime — Attempt to pervert course of justice — Accused driver of motorvehicle involved in fatal collision — Stated had swerved to avoid deer — Charged with causing death by dangerous driving and attempting to pervert course of justice by falsely claiming to have swerved to avoid deer — Whether charge of attempt to pervert course of justice relevant
Justiciary — Procedure — Indictment — Relevancy — Attempt to pervert course of justice — Accused driver of motorvehicle involved in fatal collision — Stated had swerved to avoid deer — Charged with causing death by dangerous driving and attempting to pervert course of justice by falsely claiming to have swerved to avoid deer — Whether charge of attempt to pervert course of justice relevant
Graham Cameron Turner was charged on an indictment at the instance of the Right Honourable W. James Wolffe QC, Her Majesty's Advocate, with having caused death by dangerous driving and attempting to pervert the course of justice. The accused lodged a preliminary plea to the relevancy of the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice. The cause called before Lord Turnbull in the High Court of Justiciary at Glasgow, for a preliminary hearing, on 5 December 2019, at which time the preliminary plea was argued.
Section 1 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (cap 52) provides that a person who causes the death of another person by driving a mechanically propelled vehicle dangerously on a road or other public place is guilty of an offence. Section 172 provides that, in certain circumstances, there is a duty to give information as to the driver of a vehicle.
The accused was the driver of a motorvehicle which was involved in a fatal collision. Passersby stopped to assist. The accused explained to them and to paramedics who attended that he had swerved to avoid a deer which had run on to the road. When the police attended, the accused identified himself as the driver of the vehicle and, under caution, stated that he had taken action to avoid striking a deer on the road. His defence to the charge of causing death by dangerous driving was that he had swerved to avoid a deer on the road. The accused was, thereafter, indicted on a charge of causing death by dangerous driving and of attempting to pervert the course of justice, in that it was alleged that his account of having swerved to avoid a deer had been untrue. The accused raised a preliminary plea relating to the relevancy of the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice.
It was argued for the accused that for a charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice there required to be a course of justice which had begun and an interference with it by the accused. At the time of speaking to the passersby and paramedics, there was no investigation and, thus, no course of justice had begun with which the accused could interfere. It was further argued that there were no averments as to how the accused's words constituted any form of interference from what would otherwise be expected to have come to pass in the ordinary and uninterrupted course of justice. An accused person could not competently face a charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice by stating his defence.
The Crown argued that the course of justice commenced with the crash as it was clear then that some investigation would have to take place. It was further argued that accused's version of events had to be enquired into which would not have been the case in the absence of a false account.
Held that: (1) when the accused spoke to the passersby and the paramedics there had been no basis upon which it could be said that, at that time, the course of justice had commenced (para 21); (2) there was a course of justice by the point at which the attending police officers advised the accused, under caution, that they were investigating the circumstances of the incident (para 22); (3) the fact that an accused person gave an account which was inconsistent with the case brought against him by the Crown did not constitute an interference with what would otherwise be expected to have come to pass in the ordinary and uninterrupted course of justice and the course of justice was not interfered with by having to take account of a claim of innocence, whether that claim was in the end rejected or not (paras 24–36); and preliminary plea to the relevancy of the charge upheld.
At advising, on 17 January 2020—
Lord Turnbull—
[1] The accused, Graham Cameron Turner, has been indicted in the High Court. He has challenged the relevancy of the second of the two charges which he faces by preliminary plea. His argument raises the unusual question of whether he can be charged with attempting to pervert the course of justice as a consequence of stating his defence to the principal charge which he faces.
[2] For the purposes of this summary I shall proceed on the basis of what I understand the Crown expect to establish in evidence. I was provided with copy police statements of the relevant witnesses to assist in understanding this. Sometime around 6.30 am, on 17 March 2018, the accused was driving a Toyota Hilux motorvehicle on the M9 motorway near to Plean, Stirling when it left the road and travelled down an embankment, striking trees and flipping on to its roof. His two male passengers both died at the scene.
[3] Various other motorists pulled over and sought to provide assistance. The accused was seen to be out of the vehicle and standing but the two passengers were inside. Ambulance personnel and police officers attended.
[4] Two of the passing motorists who stopped, Ms Sheridan and Mr Stewart, spoke to the accused. They described him...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
David Grier Against Chief Constable, Police Scotland And David Grier Against The Lord Advocate
...to pervert the course of justice. The essence of that charge was denying knowledge of the true nature of the Ticketus deal. In HMA v Turner 2021 JC 92, Lord Turnbull held at a preliminary hearing that the scope of the offence did not extend to denial by an accused person of guilt of the cha......