The appellant raised two issues on appeal. The first issue was that the Advocate-depute included in their indictment Count 1, which was a count for false imprisonment of one Tracy McGhee, and Count 2 was for distributing Amphetamines, in contravention of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, Section 4(3)(b). The issue on appeal was that the Advocate-deputes did not lead any evidence at trial for either of these Counts, therefore they should not have been included in the indictment. The appellant asked to separate these charges from the other charges, but this request was refused. Furthermore, the Advocate-depute did not attempt to rectify this by changing the indictment to omit these counts. The trial judge acquitted the appellant on these two charges, and gave explicit instructions to the jury not to consider these two counts. However, when the trial judge gave his instructions to the jury, he asked the jury to consider if including these counts in the indictment was fair or unfair. This is not the function of the jury, rather, the judge is to make this assessment.
The second issue on appeal was that a witness, Samuel Quigg, stated on the stand that he was indicted for conspiracy to commit robbery in 1988, along with the appellant, Mr. Donnell. This prejudiced the appellant, as evidence of any prior convictions cannot be used against him. Although this was not a prior conviction that was brought up by the witness, it was an indictment, the context was that he was being asked about his prior convictions, so the jury could probably assume that the witness was convicted along with appellant. This statement was volunteered by Mr. Quigg, not solicited by the Advocate-depute or the appellant’s solicitor, a fact that is significant.
That there was evidence of a prior conviction before the jury was in contravention of Section 101 of Scotland’s Criminal Procedure Act 1995. The appellant asked
This case concerned an individual, David Thomas Donnell (appellant), who was convicted of recklessly discharging a firearm; murder; possessing an unregistered handgun and silencer, in contravention of Firearms Act 1968, Section 2(1); and possessing an unregistered shotgun,…
Question 1 (part b) a) Conviction on indictment is a conviction after an indictment aimed not at finding the accused guilty but that the crime was probably committed and the same committed by the accused. An indictable offense under the Act includes the disclosure of information by a relevant person without lawful authority to disclose the information.
The largest categories are the Barristers and Solicitors. Legal Executives and Licensed Conveyancers are specialized practitioners that are an off-shoot of the need for more law practitioners than was available from the pool of Barristers and Solicitors. Barristers deal with the advocacy or representation of clients before the courts and with the high level consultancy on difficult or specialist cases where trial is the common outcome.
The numbers of cases filed in the courts have always been increasing like in any other nation, and the pressure arising from resolving these conflicts requires integrated effort and procedures to deliver justice appropriately. ADR not only touches on the legal education and the practitioners, but affects the society and parties seeking to resolve their differences.
When scrutiny is done on the trustworthiness or authority of reasoning, we might be asking about its rigor locally to some system or paradigm or worldly in its efforts to establish one system over all others. Most legal system do not support well argued stories on both sides, the reason is, it is not the case the physical universe supports well argued stories on both sides of arbitrary proposition of physical chemistry, this not only happens in law, there is confident in its regularity that we put lawyers under a professional obligation of zealous representation without even asking whether the clients case has a leg for zeal to stand on .Why do most cases support well argued stories on bot
(Gelsthorpe, 2002, page 106). Crime control values gives emphasis on the supposition of guiltiness and fault in such a manner that the law enforcement are perceived as acting in good faith with the intention that when they take somebody into custody it is for the reason that they are blameworthy and there is little for the courts to do other than nod through this judgment (Coleman & Norris, 2002 , page 140).
Secular laws on the other hand are made by the people in effect and regards to the changing world order, views and accepted ideologies. Religious laws define the faith of the people telling them what to believe as well as how to behave so that our actions do not violate the
The essay intends to make comparative analysis of the cases related to religion along with measuring the effectiveness of law to deal with such cases. The comparative analysis of secularity factor within varied states has provided greater understanding about the nature of pluralism as well as the role of religion in modern society.
12 pages (3000 words)Essay
Hire a pro to write a paper under your requirements!
Win a special DISCOUNT!
Put in your e-mail and click the button with your lucky finger
Apply my DISCOUNT
Got a tricky question? Receive an answer from students like you!Try us!
Let us find you an essay for FREE
Contact us via Live Chat, call us at +16312120006or send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org