The defendants appealed against their convictions and sentence for violent disorder and assault during an uprising at Yarl’s Wood Detention centre. It was said that witnesses had been coached, other defence witnesses had been returned to their countries of origin, depriving the defendants of a fair trial, and jurors had complained to the judge about the behaviour of other jurors.
Held: The detention officer witnesses had received counselling both as to the after effects of the confrontation, and they had been supported in practising giving evidence in a fictional scenario designed to reflect some of the incidents which had occurred. The judge directed the jury ‘There is no place for witness training in our country, we do not do it. It is unlawful.’ A ‘witness should give his or her own evidence, so far as practicable uninfluenced by what anyone else has said, whether in formal discussions or informal conversations.’ The court discussed the dangers of therapy, in this cognitive cognitive and group therapies and the practising of giving evidence. A witness could properly be familiarised with the court and likely procedures, but should not discuss proposed or intended evidence. Written records should be kept, and in case of doubt, counsel’s advice should be sought. In this case the safety of the prosecution had not been undermined.
Lord Justice Judge Sir Michael Wright The Honourable Mrs Justice Dobbs Dbe
[2005] EWCA Crim 177, Times 09-Feb-2005, [2005] 1 WLR 3442, [2005] Crim LR 588, [2005] 2 All ER 571, [2005] 2 Cr App R 6, (2005) 169 JP 186
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Richardson CACD 1971
Statements and proofs of one witness should not be disclosed to any other witness. . .
Cited – Regina v Arif CA 17-Jun-1993
Pre-trial discussion of evidence by potential witnesses is to be to be discouraged. . .
Cited – Regina v Skinner CACD 6-Dec-1993
Witnesses should not rehearse their evidence together before going into court. Farquharson LJ said: ‘It has certainly been permissible, since Lord Goddard’s time, for officers to confer together in the making up of their notebooks immediately after . .
Cited – Regina v Shaw CACD 2002
Discussions between witnesses should not take place, and the statements and proofs of one witness should not be disclosed to any other witness. . .
Cited by:
Cited – Saunders and Tucker, Regina (on the Application of) v The Association of Chief Police Officers and others Admn 10-Oct-2008
The deceased had been shot by police during an armed siege. His family complained that the Independent Police Complaints Commission had declined to order the officers not to confer with each other before making statements.
Held: The authority . .
Cited – Athwal and Others, Regina v CACD 7-May-2009
The appellants challenged their conviction for murder and sentences. The victim was the young second wife of the first defendant. It was said that she had been unfaithful, and having been lured to India, had been murdered there. She had disappeared, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Leading Case
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.222175