Collins and Keep v Regina: CACD 28 Jan 2004

When arrested with a co-defendant, C had said nothing as his co-defendant gave a false explanation. He now appealed his conviction saying that the judge had left with the jury the question of whether he was adopting that lie by his own silence.
Held: The cases on an absence of response to an accusation or identification were not directly to the point of adopting a co-accused’s lie. Such silence could be used as evidence without necessarily breaching his right to a fair trial, but in this case the judge had not explored the necessary protections to accompany any such direction. Mere silence withoutmore should not normally be taken to be an adoption of a co-accused’s lie.
The Hon Recorder Of Middlesbrough Mr Jusice Mccombe Lord Justice Thomas
[2004] EWCA Crim 83, Gazette 26-Feb-2004, [2004] 2 Cr App 199, [2004] 1 WLR 1705
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRex v Christie HL 1914
The House considered the admissibility in evidence of a false statement made in the defendant’s presence, but uncontradicted by him: ‘the rule of law undoubtedly is that a statement made in the presence of an accused person, even on an occasion . .
CitedHall v Regina PC 1970
The court asked as to the modern application of the dicta in Christie with regard to the admissibility of false statements made in the presence of a defendant but uncontradicted by him. In this case there had been no positive act to adopt the lie. . .
CitedRegina v Mitchell 1892
The court gave the following direction to the jury as to the way in which they should treat the response of the accused to an accusation made in his presence: ‘Now the whole admissibility of statements of this kind rests upon the consideration that . .
CitedParkes v Regina PC 1976
The court considered whether to admit as evidence against the accused his response to an accusation made by the victim’s mother when no police officer was present and to which the defendant had reacted by threatening her. . .
CitedRegina v Chandler CACD 1975
The defendant had refused to comment on allegations put to him when interviewed by the police. His solicitor was present.
Held: After quoting Hall, the court commented: ‘We have reservations about these two statements of law because they seem . .
CitedRegina v Horne CACD 1990
The victim had been ‘glassed’ in a restaurant. Tne defendant was brought before the victim who immediately identified him as the assailant. He made no answer.
Held: The judge was correct to direct the jury to take the defendant’s silence in . .
CitedRegina v Raviraj CACD 1986
The court described the circumstances where a defendant’s failure to provide an account of circumstances might lead to an inference being drawn against him: ‘where suspicious circumstances appear to demand an explanation, and no explanation . . . is . .
CitedCondron v The United Kingdom ECHR 2-May-2000
A direction to a jury about an accused person’s silence during police questioning was inadequate to protect the right to a fair trial. The applicants had been advised by their solicitor to remain silent during interview because they were withdrawing . .

Cited by:
CitedRegina v Osborne CACD 2-Nov-2005
The defendant challenged admission of a statement made in his presence but not contradicted by him.
Held: The court must first ask whether the defendant’s reaction was relevant. Where acquiescence was alleged, three considerations arose: 1) . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 03 May 2021; Ref: scu.192289