header-logo header-logo

06 March 2013 / Hle Blog
Issue: 7551 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-detail

Vulnerable victims

HLE blogger Elaine Freer defends the criminal justice system

The recent suicide of Frances Andrade has sparked debate once again on the treatment of victims by the court system. Mrs Andrade had, days earlier, testified at the trial of her former music teacher, accused of rape and sexual abuse of her over a period of years. She took her own life while the trial was still continuing.

Mrs Andrades had chosen to give her evidence in full view of the court. As she was a vulnerable witness, due to the nature of the crimes allegedly committed against her, she would have had the option of benefitting from a variety of different measures that are enshrined in the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999.

However, although not in the discretion of the court as for some other classes of witnesses, these measures are still only provided on a requested basis, not an automatic one. Furthermore, such measures cannot usually be forced upon a witness—the statute states that the views of the witness should be taken into consideration when making decisions on special measures.

The family of Frances Andrade have made it clear that the accusations levelled at her in cross examination were “more than she could bear”. It is, however, indisputable that the questions to which they specifically refer were necessary from the defence’s point of view—they were putting forward the defendant’s case and testing the veracity of the claims.

The barrister remained within the Code of Conduct, and it is hard to see how her approach can be criticised. Indeed, not to test the evidence properly would itself be a breach of the Code of Conduct, which requires that barristers, “must at all times promote and protect fearlessly and by all proper and lawful means his lay client’s best interests”.

It is impossible to view Mrs Andrade’s suicide as anything other than a tragedy. However, to accuse the criminal justice system of causing it by abject failure is to misunderstand the system, and the elements that are crucial to retain the notion of a defendant being innocent until they are proven to be guilty on the strength of evidence before the court alone.”

To read in full go to: www.halsburyslawexchange.co.uk

 

Issue: 7551 / Categories: Blogs
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Jean-François Le Gal

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Jean-François Le Gal

Penningtons Manches Cooper strengthens international disputes team with appointment of leading arbitration partner

Shakespeare Martineau—Aaron Sanders & Kate Saunders

Shakespeare Martineau—Aaron Sanders & Kate Saunders

Shakespeare Martineau strengthens trust and estates disputes team with new appointments

Bellevue Law—Shannon Moore

Bellevue Law—Shannon Moore

Bellevue Law strengthens employment disputes and international advisory capability with senior associate appointment

NEWS
A divorced woman has secured funding to participate in her former husband’s inquest after the Legal Aid Agency reconsidered repeated refusals
The Thirlwall Inquiry has exposed a ‘complete failure’ to protect babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital, but its recommendations must now be put into practice
More than 500 former rugby players can pursue brain injury claims despite serious failures to disclose documents ordered by the High Court
When does a solicitor’s retainer become a contentious business agreement? The Court of Appeal’s decision in Broadfield Law UK LLP v Barnes shows that listing hourly rates alone will not do, leaving firms and clients uncertain about their rights over bills
Developers in areas with poorly performing councils can apply directly to the Planning Inspectorate for permission under section 62A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
back-to-top-scroll