PC (The Bahamas) The Board considered a suggestion that the defendants second re-trial for murder was an abuse of process: ‘It is a common practice for prosecutors in England and Wales to offer no evidence against a defendant if two previous juries have been unable to agree . . but that is no more than a convention, as recognised by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) in R v Henworth . . it may well be that the prosecuting authorities, having failed to obtain a conviction even by a majority on two occasions, judge that a further trial will not have a reasonable prospect of culminating in a conviction. It is in the first instance for the prosecutor to judge whether, taking account of all relevant considerations, the public interest is better served by offering no evidence or by seeking a further re-trial. There is plainly no rule of law in this country which forbids a prosecutor from seeking a second re-trial . . there may of course be cases in which, on their particular facts, a second re-trial may be oppressive and unjust . . whether a second re-trial should be permitted depends on an informed and dispassionate assessment of how the interests of justice in the widest sense are best served. Full account must be taken of the defendant’s interests . . account must also be taken of the public interest in convicting the guilty, deterring violent crime and maintaining confidence in the efficacy of the criminal justice system.’
(The Bahamas)
Judges:
Lord Bingham of Cornhill
Citations:
Appeal No 48 of 2000, [2001] UKPC 19
Links:
Jurisdiction:
Commonwealth
Cited by:
Cited – Bell, Regina v CACD 19-Jan-2010
The defendant appealed against his conviction, saying that it had taken place only at the prosecution’s third attempt, the two earlier trials reaching no majority verdict. He said that the third trial was an abuse.
Held: There had been no . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice, Commonwealth
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174515
