Recent Judicial Decisions
| Author | Rob R. Jerrard |
| Published date | 01 January 2000 |
| Date | 01 January 2000 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0032258X0007300114 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
ROB R. JERRARD, LLB, LLM
Legal Correspondent for The Police Journal
RECENT JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Intimidation via messenger
Attorney-Generals Reference (No.1
of
1999) Court of Appeal
(1999) The Times, July 6
The statute
Section 51 of the Criminal Justiceand Public Order Act 1994 Act
provides:
"(1) A person who does to another person (a) an act which
intimidates, and is intended to intimidate, that other person; (b)
knowing or believing that the other person is assisting in the
investigation of an offence or is a witness or potential witness or a
juror or potential juror in proceedings for an offence; and (c)
intending thereby to cause the investigation or the course of justice
to be obstructed, perverted or interfered with, commits an offence."
The Reference under s.36 of the CriminalJustice Act 1972:
"Whether the offence of witness intimidation contrary to s.51(1) of
the CriminalJustice and Public Order Act 1994 is committed in
circumstances where a person makes a threat to a witness via a third
party, intending that the third party will pass on the threat to the
witness and intending that the witness will be intimidated by the
threat."
The law
The court said that the acquitted defendant and his son worked at a
London market. At 11pm a night shift worker came on duty. Half an
hour later the defendant's son attacked him with an iron bar, causing
serious injuries. The attack was witnessed by A. The defendant
approached B, A's stepfather, later that night and told him that if the
defendant's son was arrested B would be burying A the next week. A
saw that as a threat to his life and was put in fear. However,
commendably, he gave a witness statement to the police. The son's plea
to an offence of unlawful wounding was accepted. The defendant was
A submission was made on his behalf at the beginning of the trial
that on the facts of the case that offence had not been committed. The
recorder accepted that submission.
If
the recorder had been right, the
effect would be that if the intimidator himself threatened a witness he
January 2000 The Police Journal 85
To continue reading
Request your trial