Jury Tampering Provisions
A applied for permission to appeal against conviction, saying that the decision on his guilt was made by the trial Judge who had discharged the jury that had been sworn to try the case, and then proceeded to give judgment himself. The Judge was exercising the powers conferred by section 46 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, in a case where there has been jury tampering. The applicant accepts that this was the case, and that it was necessary to bring the jury’s role to an end. His case is that he was wholly uninvolved in the jury tampering, and that the right course of action would have been to terminate the trial altogether and start again with another jury. He submits that it was wrong for a Judge alone to determine whether he was guilty, and he seeks an order for a retrial.
Held: The statute had given the defendant opportunity to appeal the use of section 46 at the time, and he had no taken it.
Holroyde LJ, Warby, Julian Knowles JJ
[2019] EWCA Crim 1256
Bailii
Criminal Justice Act 2003 46 47
England and Wales
Criminal Practice
Updated: 13 January 2022; Ref: scu.642570
