Regina 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 the face of an accusation into account. Whether any reply might be expected in the circumstances was one of fact for the jury.

Citations:

[1990] Crim LR 188

Jurisdiction:

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 . .
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 . .

Cited by:

CitedCollins 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.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 13 May 2022; Ref: scu.192726