![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions >> AM, R. v [2012] EWCA Crim 2056 (24 July 2012) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2012/2056.html Cite as: [2013] Crim LR 327, [2012] WLR(D) 228, [2012] EWCA Crim 2056, [2013] 1 Cr App R 5, [2013] 1 WLR 958 |
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Buy ICLR report: [2013] 1 WLR 958] [View ICLR summary: [2012] WLR(D) 228] [Help]
CRIMINAL DIVISION
The Strand London WC2A 2LL |
||
B e f o r e :
(Lord Judge)
MR JUSTICE MACKAY
and
MR JUSTICE SWEENEY
____________________
R E G I N A | ||
- v - | ||
A M |
____________________
Wordwave International Ltd (a Merrill Communications Company)
165 Fleet Street, London EC4
Telephone No: 020 7404 1400; Fax No: 020 7404 1424
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
Mr R Hearnden appeared on behalf of the Crown
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE:
"(1) The jury to try an issue before a court shall be selected by ballot in open court from the panel, or part of the panel, of jurors summoned to attend at the time and place in question.
...."
"(1) No judgment after verdict in any trial by jury in any court shall be stayed or revered by reason --
(a) that the provisions of this Act about the summoning or impanelling of jurors, or the selection of jurors by ballot, have not been complied with, ....
(2) Subsection (1)(a) above shall not apply to any irregularity if objection is taken at, or as soon as practicable after, the time it occurs, and the irregularity is not corrected.
...."
"The law now requires me to discharge the whole lot of you, but your names will be recalled and you will be re-sworn in the presence of the new juror who is about to be brought into court. So I am going to discharge you. Will you please sit at the side. Thank you very much."
The court record of what follows reads:
"Jury cont. 11 old jurors into court. Gap re juror no. 10. Jury re-sworn with no. 13 replacing 10 -- others stay in same seats."
From that record the court concluded that what happened was:
(1) The original juror was discharged.
(2) One spare juror from the panel was brought into court.
(3) The eleven jurors who had previously been sworn, and the additional juror, were sworn in to try the same case with the new juror taking the position in the jury box which had previously been occupied by juror number 10.
The court concluded that the judge had failed to comply with section 11(1) of the Juries Act 1974, and that there was a breach of the balloting requirement. The ballot which took place before the original jury were sworn was irrelevant because that jury had been discharged. In short, in almost identical circumstances to those which arise in the present appeal, it was held that the terms of section 11(1) of the 1974 Act were contravened.
MR JARVIS: My Lord, may I raise a very brief matter?
THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE: Yes?
MR JARVIS: My Lord, there was a first appeal we had some years ago now and the court imposed a section 4(1) embargo on the publication of it. I do not know whether that has ever been lifted. Your Lordships' judgment today brings this case to an effective conclusion. I do not know whether the court would wish to say that that previous judgment ought now to be capable of publication?
THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE: The issues raised in this appeal may now be published. The identity of the victim of the rapes must not be brought to the public attention. For the purposes of reporting the initials "AM" may be the appropriate way to deal with it.