A licensee appealed his conviction saying that the statements made and relied upon should only have been put under caution.
Held: Maurice Kay J said:’there is force in Mr Stobart’s submission that in those circumstances any reasonable police officer would have suspected that an offence was being committed and would have suspected that the appellant, as the licensee, was one of the persons committing it.’ As to the question put to him, ‘The appellant might answer the question in a number of ways. He might answer it truthfully or untruthfully, but it is a fundamental observation that he was being invited to incriminate himself if he was in fact committing an offence. Moreover, according to Sergeant Scrivens, that is precisely what the appellant did, and as a result the evidence of what Sergeant Scrivens attributed to him became crucial in the subsequent trial.’
Judges:
Maurice Kay J
Citations:
[1998] EWHC Admin 212
Cited by:
Distinguished – Ridehalgh, Regina (on the Application of) v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 23-May-2005
The appellant a police officer had arrived at work having been drinking. A senior officer asked if he had driven to work. He replied yes, and on that basis had been convicted of driving with excess alcohol. He appealed saying that the question . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 12 April 2022; Ref: scu.138333