Little v H. M. Advocate
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 10 February 1983 |
| Date | 10 February 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 5. |
| Court | High Court of Justiciary |
JC
L.J.-G. Emslie Lords Cameron, Avonside.
Evidence—Sufficiency—Whether trial judge erred in rejecting submission of no case to answer—Whether if so evidence led for accused could be taken into account against accused on appeal—Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1975 (cap. 21), Sec. 140A.1
The two appellants and a co-accused were tried on indictment with the murder of the husband of the first appellant. The indictment libelled that both appellants had instigated their co-accused to shoot the deceased and had offered him money to do so, that the first appellant had also paid money to the co-accused and that the second appellant had assisted the co-accused in concealing the body. The evidence against both appellants was circumstantial. At the close of the evidence for the Crown it was submitted on behalf of both appellants in terms of S.140A of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1975 that there was insufficient evidence to entitle the jury to find that they had instigated
the killing. Both submissions were repelled and both appellants were convicted. At the appeal it was conceded on behalf of the first appellant that even if the trial judge had erred in rejecting her submission of no case to answer, the Court, in considering whether there had been a miscarriage of justice was entitled to have regard to the evidence led on her behalf.Held (1) That the evidence adduced by the Crown was sufficient to permit the inference by the jury beyond reasonable doubt that both appellants had instigated, and were therefore guilty of, the murder. (2) That it was therefore unnecessary to consider whether, if the trial judge had erred in refusing the submissions under S.140A of the 1975 Act, the evidence given by or for either an accused or by a co-accused could be considered on appeal in determining whether a material miscarriage of justice had occurred; and appeal dismissed.
Observed that S.140A of the 1975 Act had introduced a novel rule into Scottish procedure and when the issue arose the Court expected full citation of authorities from England and Commonwealth jurisdictions where a similar rule was a familiar part of their procedure.
Veronica Sharkey or Little, Elaine Freda Haggarty and William Francis MacKenzie were charged on an indictment which set forth that:—"On 24th or 25th November 1981 at the house occupied by you William Francis MacKenzie at 14 Cairn Drive, Lincluden, Dumfries, or elsewhere in Dumfries to the Prosecutor unknown you Veronica Sharkey or Little and Elaine Freda Haggarty did instigate you William Francis MacKenzie to murder David Little, 44 Osborne Crescent, Dumfries, the husband of you Veronica Sharkey or Little, and did offer to pay you William Francis MacKenzie £120 of money to shoot said David Little, in consequence whereof you William Francis MacKenzie did on 25th November 1981 in the garden ground behind numbers 29/31 Cairn Circle, Lincluden, aforesaid assault said David Little present and repeatedly discharge a loaded firearm, namely a 22 rifle at him and did shoot him repeatedly in the body and head whereby he received injuries from which he there and then died; and on 25th or 26th November 1981 you William Francis MacKenzie and you Elaine Freda Haggarty did remove the body of said David Little from said garden ground behind numbers 29/31 Cairn Circle, Lincluden, aforesaid and did convey it to ground adjoining a lay-by on the U.233 Ingleston road at a part thereof approximately one quarter mile from its junction with the Terregles to Shawhead Road, Nithsdale District, Dumfries and Galloway Region and did conceal it there; and on 25th November 1981 at 14 Cairn Drive, Lincluden aforesaid you Veronica Sharkey or Little and Elaine Freda Haggarty did pay to you William Francis MacKenzie £70 of money (or some other sum to the Prosecutor unknown) in payment for shooting said David Little, and you Veronica Sharkey or Little, Elaine Freda Haggarty and William Francis MacKenzie...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Abdelbaset Al Megrahi V. Her Majesty's Advocate
...Kerr v HM AdvocateUNK, unreported, 30 January 2002 Kidd v HM AdvocateSC 2000 JC 509 King v HM AdvocateSC 1999 JC 226 Little v HM AdvocateSC 1983 JC 16 McIlhargey v HerronSC 1972 JC 38 Mackie HM AdvocateSC 1994 JC 132 McLeod HM AdvocateSC 1998 JC 67 Mack HM AdvocateUNK 1999 SCCR 181 Mailley ......
-
Appendices To The Rosepark Nursing Home Fatal Accident Inquiry
...all of them, when viewed independently, may be explicable upon other hypotheses": Dickson, para. 108; see also Little v. H.M. Advocate 1983 JC 16, 20 per the Lord Justice General (Lord Emslie). 15.6. "When proof of each of a series of facts raises an inference of the existence of another fa......
-
Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi V. Her Majesty's Advocate
...of the trial court to decide which interpretation to adopt. [33]The first case relied upon by the Advocate depute was Little v HM Advocate 1983 JC 16. At page 20 the Lord Justice-General (Emslie), delivering the opinion of the court, referred to an argument for one of the appellants in that......
-
Smith v Lees
...JC 31 Gracey v. HM AdvocateSC 1987 JC 45 Horne v. HM AdvocateUNK 1991 SCCR 248 Jamieson v. HM AdvocateSC 1994 JC 88 Little v. HM AdvocateSC 1983 JC 16 Lockwood v. WalkerSC 1910 SC (J) 3 Mackie v. HM AdvocateSC 1994 JC 132 Manuel v. HM AdvocateSC 1958 JC 41 Martin v. HM AdvocateUNK 1993 SCCR......