The defendant said that he had assisted the police, but that the court had given it insufficient weight on sentencing.
Held: The court declined to investigate the dispute between the defendant and police officers as to the extent of his assistance. Hughes J set out the applicable principles: i) The information is supplied by the police at the request of the offender;
ii) Without confirmation by the police, an offender’s statement that he has provided assistance is unlikely to be of assistance;
iii) As the courts rely so heavily on police confirmation, the greatest care has to be exercised by the police in the provision of the information;
iv) Absent issues of Public Interest Immunity, the text should be shown to counsel for the defence who can discuss it with the offender;
v) There should normally be no question of evidence being given or an issue tried about it. If the offender disagreed, then questioning of the police officer would almost inevitably be contrary to the public interest.
Judges:
Hughes J
Citations:
[1999] 2 Cr App R 125
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – AXN v The Queen CACD 27-May-2016
The defendant argued that greater note should have been taken on his sentencing to allow for the assistance he had given to the police after his arrest.
Held: The current accepted practice is that the text of the letter from the police to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Sentencing
Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.564847
