Recent Judicial Decisions
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X9306600214 |
| Published date | 01 April 1993 |
| Author | John Wood |
| Date | 01 April 1993 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
is the largest jail in the World. It serves/houses over 7,000 inmates. The
PACE Institute serves over 500 inmates per year in its educational
programs. It has a lower rate of recidivism for inmates who have been in
PACE, than the recidivism rate for the Cook County Jail as a whole. This
shows it works. Moreover, in November 1990, 80
percentofthe
PACE
students who took the General Education Diplomatest passed the test and
are are now eligible for educational and job training programs. Given
these statistics, smart educational programming can help correctional
institutions lower the cost for housing and maintaining the offenders by
giving them the hope for a brighter future for themselves and their
families.
PROFESSOR SIR
JOHN
WOOD, C.B.E., L.L.M.
The University
of
Sheffield Legal Correspondent
of
the Police Journal
RECENT JUDICIAL DECISIONS
DOUBLE JEOPARDY
Richards v. The Queen
The appellant had been arraigned in the Home Circuit Court in Kingston,
Jamaica, chargedwithmurder. He pleaded guilty to manslaughterand the
trial Judge indicated that he would accept the plea. The case was then
adjourned so that witnesses as to character could be called before the
prisonerwas sentenced. It appears that counsel had had discussions with
the Judge before the case opened. He had indicated that if the Crown
would accept the lesser plea then the Judge would not disagree with that
proposal.
The Director
of
Public Prosecutions has power under s.94(3)(c) of the
Constitution of Jamaica to discontinue any criminal proceedings at any
time prior tojudgment being delivered. This powerwasexercisedbecause
the Directordid not think that the plea should have been accepted. A nolli
prosequi was entered. A fresh indictment was then issued, charging
Richards with murder again. He was tried before another Judge and jury,
found guilty and sentenced todeath. He appealedon various grounds. The
Privy Council had to determine that laid under the Constitution which, in
s.20(8), provides that:
"No
person who shows that he has been tried by any competent court
for a criminal offence and either convicted or acquitted shall again be
tried for that offence or any other criminal offence of which he could
have been convicted at the trial for that offence save upon the order of
asuperior court made in the course of appeal proceedings
."
220 ThePoliceJournal
April
1993
To continue reading
Request your trial