Regina v Hulusi and Purvis: CACD 1973

The defendant appealed against his conviction, complaining of the judge’s repeated hostile interventions. Lawton LJ said: ‘Time and time again the judge intervened, got an answer and then asked questions on that answer. The impression he must have given was that he was cross-examining on the evidence in-chief as it was being given. It really was most unfortunate.’
Held: The conviction was quashed. The defendant and his witnesses had ‘effectively prevented the defendant or a witness for the defence from telling his story in his own way.’

Judges:

Lawton LJ

Citations:

(1973) 58 Cr App R 378

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

AdoptedRegina v Hamilton CACD 9-Jun-1969
Lord Parker CJ discussed the duties of a judge in a criminal trial: ‘Of course it has been recognised always that it is wrong for a judge to descend into the arena and give the impression of acting as advocate . . Whether his interventions in any . .

Cited by:

CitedMichel v The Queen (The Court of Appeal of Jersey) PC 4-Nov-2009
michel_rPC2009
(Jersey) The defendant appealed, complaining that the number and character of the judge’s interventions in his trial for money laundering had made it unfair.
Held: The conviction was quashed and the case remitted for a decision as to . .
CitedMarchant, Regina v CACD 23-Nov-2018
The defendant appealed his conviction for rape saying that the judge had improperly intervened to prevent him presenting his case properly.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Although the judge had overstepped the proper boundaries in his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 12 July 2022; Ref: scu.377804