Judicial Review of a decision of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission not to refer his case to the High Court in terms of section 194B of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995.
Held: The application was refused.
As to the failure of the defendant to deny what he told the police: ‘[I]t was clearly relevant for the respondents to recognise that the petitioner has never disputed the truth of what he told the police in his interview and, in particular, that he has never suggested that he did not have sexual intercourse with the complainer. What he now seeks to do is to take advantage of a subsequent change in the law rendering inadmissible evidence which was not in dispute at the trial, videlicet evidence that he admitted having intercourse with the complainer. It would, in my opinion, be repugnant to the interests of justice if the petitioner were now to be permitted to invoke Cadder for the purpose of ruling out uncontested evidence that was essential to the technical sufficiency of the Crown case at his trial. To do so would allow the petitioner to transform what was a non-issue at the trial into an issue of critical importance years later. That would run counter to the principle of finality and certainty that is central to the fair working of the criminal justice system.’
Judges:
Lod Pentland
Citations:
[2013] ScotCS CSOH – 13, [2013] CSOH 13
Links:
Jurisdiction:
Scotland
Citing:
Cited – RM and Another, Re Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission HCJ 25-Apr-2012
Lord Justice-General Hamilton considered the role of the Commission and its relationship with the court, and stated: ‘Although this court has been given the power to reject a reference in language that replicates the provision applicable to the . .
Cited – Chamberlain-Davidson, Re Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission HCJ 25-Apr-2012
. .
Cited by:
Appeal from – Gordon, for Judicial Review SCS 29-Nov-2013
(Extra Division, Inner House) Challenge to refusal of order for review of failure of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission to refer the reclaimer’s case to the High Court.
Held: Appeal refused. . .
See Also – Gordon v Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (Scotland) SC 22-Mar-2017
The appellant the Commission’s decision not to refer his case back to the court. They had agreed that a miscarriage of justice might have occurred, but concluded that it was not in the interests of justice to make such a referral. His statement had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 25 July 2022; Ref: scu.470717