Site icon swarb.co.uk

Regina v SH: CACD 3 Aug 2010

The prosecutor had appealed immediately against the judge’s withdrawal of a charge of racially aggravated use of insulting words or behaviour. The judge then ignored his obligation to continue the trial without mentioning the issue to the jury. He said in terms that the charge should not have been brought to the Crown Court. The defendant was said to have abused and threatened a Job Centre worker with racial overtones. The judge had said that if the words were used, the jury could not safely conclude they went beyond dislike to dislike on racial grounds.
Held: The prosecutor’s appeal succeeded. The judge had fallen into the same error as had the justices in M. He had confused whether the words demonstrated racial intent when the Act required that the choice of words be racially motivated. Furthermore, it was difficult to see how it can be suggested that repeated angry references to a Nigerian as a ‘monkey’ or ‘black monkey’ do not generate a prima facie case of an outward manifestation of racial hostility.
The judge was criticised for his approach. Though it was accepted that the difficulties arose from extraordinary pressure being placed on Crown Courts, he had overstepped the mark.

Judges:

Leveson LJ, Holroyde, Spencer JJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 1931, [2011] 1 Cr App R 14

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Public Order Act 1986 4(1), Crime and Disorder Act 1998, Criminal Justice Act 2003 58

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRG and LT v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 28-Jan-2004
The court contrasted allegations under sections 28(1)(a) and 28(1)(b): ‘paragraph (a) form is not concerned so much with the offender’s state of mind but with what he did or said so as to demonstrate racial hostility towards the victim. In contrast, . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v M (A Minor) Admn 25-May-2004
There was an argument over payment for food with the Turkish chef of a takeaway kebab shop during the course of which the defendant used the words ‘bloody foreigners’ and pushed the shop window causing it to crack. The justices doubted whether the . .
CitedRogers, Regina v HL 28-Feb-2007
The House was asked whether the use of the phrases ‘bloody foreigners’ and ‘get back to your own country’ counted to make a disturbance created by the defendant a racially aggravated crime.
Held: (Baroness Hale of Richmond) ‘The mischiefs . .
CitedRegina v Falconer-Atlee CACD 1973
It was wrong for a judge who was not prepared to stop the case himself to cast that responsibility on to the jury. . .
CitedCrown Prosecution Service v C, M and H CACD 11-Dec-2009
The CPS sought leave to appeal against a terminating ruling. It had failed to produce and serve evidence on the defendant even after an adjournment for the purpose. The judge directed an acquittal and refused an adjournment to allow the CPS to . .
CitedCollins and Others, Regina v CACD 20-Apr-2007
The court (per Gage LJ) considered it strongly arguable that the practice of allowing to the jury the right to acquit an accused at any time after the close of the prosecution case, could not survive Article 6. Gage LJ identified the dangers . .
CitedRegina v Middlesex Quarter Sessions, ex parte Director of Public Prosecutions QBD 1952
The court considered a trial on indictment where there was jurisdiction to try the offence charged. After pleas had been taken and counsel for the Crown had opened the prosecution case to the jury, the chairman intervened and directed the jury to . .
CitedRegina v Kemp CACD 25-Apr-1994
A judge should do no more than intimate that the jury has right to stop a trial. . .
CitedFB v Regina CACD 27-Jul-2010
The court reversed three decisions where a particular judge had said that the CPS should not have begun prosecutions, saying ‘We recognise these [ever increasing financial] pressures only too well and recognise also the need for every court to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Criminal Practice

Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.421334

Exit mobile version