header-logo header-logo

31 March 2022
Issue: 7973 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Witness intimidation guidelines issued

The Sentencing Council has proposed its first set of guidelines for the offences of perverting the course of justice and witness intimidation

The Sentencing Council has proposed its first set of guidelines for the offences of perverting the course of justice and witness intimidation.

Currently, there are no guidelines for perverting the course of justice and only limited guidance in the magistrates’ courts for witness intimidation. The Council decided not to include perjury, contempt of court and assisting an offender as incidents of these are relatively low (only five people were sentenced for perjury in 2020, 20 for contempt and 40 for assisting an offender).

It proposed sentences ranging from a community order to between two and seven years of custody for perverting the course of justice, depending on levels of harm and culpability. For witness intimidation, it proposed a range from a community order up to four years in prison.

In 2020, about 400 people were sentenced for perverting the course of justice. The common law offence, which is indictable only, currently has a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. The offence includes giving false information to police officers at a traffic stop, so avoiding prosecution, to fabricating evidence designed to incriminate an innocent person. 

About 180 people were sentenced in 2020 for witness intimidation, under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, an offence which includes pressuring witnesses to withdraw allegations or witness statements or not to give evidence in court.

Sentencing Council member, Mrs Justice Juliet May said: ‘Perverting the course of justice and witness intimidation are serious offences that strike at the heart of justice: they can delay or even derail criminal investigations; they can cast suspicion on innocent people; and victims and witnesses can feel too scared to make a complaint about a crime they have suffered, or have witnessed.’

The 12-week Sentencing Council consultation, which can be found here, ends on 22 June.
Issue: 7973 / Categories: Legal News , Procedure & practice , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll