RLIT0000520
RLIT0000520
CuapTer 28
OFFENCES AGAINST PUBLIC JUSTICE
PARA
I. Perverting the Course of Justice. © 2 2... 2 2 eee 28-1
A. Elements. . pee ew we 28-1
B. — Acts Capable of Constituting the Offence Se 28-2
(1) Introduction
(2) False allegations
(3) Perjury .
(4) Concealment of evidence
(5) Obstructing police :
(6) Assisting offender to evade arrest .
(7) Abuse of police discretion . .
(8) Procuring and indemnifying sureties .
(9) Interfering with witne:
, evidence or jurors
(10) Frustrating the enforcement of court orders.
(11) Publication prejudicial to fair trial
CG. Tending to Pervert the Course of Justice.
D. Intending to Pervert the Course of Justice
E. The Course of Justice
F Indictment.
G. Sentence
IL. Concealment of Evidence
II. Contempt of Court
A. Introduction
B. Common Law .
(1) Introduction oo
(2) Civil and criminal contempts
(3) Standard of proof
(4) Mens rea
(5) Ace
(6) Confidential information
(7) Contempt by jurors oe
(8) Interference with persons concer erned i in litigation .
(9) Revenge on persons concerned in litigation .
(10) Abuse of process .
(11) Publi
(12) Publication relating to proceedings in private
(13) Non-compliance with court order .
C. Contempt of Court Act 1981
(1) Introduction
(2) Strict liability rule :
(3) Jury deliberations and audio recordings
to justice
tion prejudicial to administration of justice.
(4) Protection of sources of information . :
(5) Publication of matter exempted from disclosure i in court.
(6) Magistrates' courts
(7) Sentencing .
(8) Interpretation .
D. — Summary Procedure .
(1) Jurisdiction
28-1
IV.
Vv.
VIL.
VILL.
28, Orrences acainst Punic Justice
(2) Contempt “in the face of the court”
(3) Exercise of summary procedure
(4) Procedure and principles
(5) Legal representation .
(6) Inquiries by another judge .
(7) Sentence
E. Procedure . toe ee
(1) Applications to magistrates’ courts, “Crown Court and
Court of Appeal .
(2) Practice direction .
(3) Applications to Divisional Court
F. Appeals. .
Intimidation of Witnesses, Jurors 0 or Persons Assisting Investigations :
Perjury . :
A Legislation .
B. Indictment.
C. Elements
(1) “Lawfully sworn”
(2) “Judicial proceeding”
(3) “Material” statement .
(4) Falsity :
D. Jurisdiction, Proof of Earlier Proceedings and Interpretation
Perjury Related Offences .
A. False Statements on Oath and Declarations .
B. — Suborning Perjury
C. Fabrication of Evidence .
D. False Written Statements Tendered i in I Evidence
E. Civil Partnerships: False Statements or Declarations
Prison Security Offences
A. Escaping from Custody and Assisting Escape
(1) Common law .
(2) Legislation .
(3) Indictments
(4) Sentence
B. Breaking Prison.
(1) Common Law .
(2) Indictment.
(3) Evidence
C. Rescuing Prisoner
() = Common Law .
(2) Indictment.
(3) Evidence
D. Prison Mutiny .
(1) Legislation .
(2) Indictment.
(3) Evidence
(4) Sentence . . . . -
E. Conveying Prohibited Articles, Pc
and Unauthorised Photography, etc. .
Wasting Police Time .
ion of Offensive Weapons,
Administering Unlawful Oaths.
I. PERVERTING THE COURSE OF JUSTICE
A. ELEMENTS
3134
RLIT0000520
RLIT0000520
28-85.
28-91
28-92
28-97
28-98
28-99
28-101
28-101
28-118
28-119
28-130
28-132
28-138
28-138
28-140
28-141
28-142
28-143
28-144
28-145
28-147
28-151
28-151
28-161
28-172
28-181
28-182
28-182
28-183
28-184
28-185
28-185
28-186
28-187
28-188
28-188
28-189
28-191
28-192
28-193
28-198
28-200
It is a common law misdemeanour to pervert the course of public justice: Vieones [1891] 1
RLIT0000520
RLIT0000520
I. Praverrine rae Course or Justice 28-3
QB. 360, CCR; Andrews [1973] Q.B. 422, CA. The offence is committed where a person or
persons:
(a) acts or embarks upon a course of condua,
h has a tendency to, and
is intended to pervert,
(d)_ the course of public justice: Vieones, above (at p.369).
A positive act, whether of concealment or distortion, is requir ed. Inaction is insufficient:
Headley [1996] R.T.R. 173, CA (failing to respond to a summons); Clark [2003] EWCA Crim
991; [2003] RTR. 27; Jabber (§ 28-5).
An attempt or incitement or conspiracy to pervert the course of justice is likewise indictable:
Andiews, above; Sharpe and Stringer (1938) 26 Cr. App. R. 122, CCA; Panayiotou and Antoniade
(1973) 57 Cr. App. R. 762, CA.
In Cotter [2002] EWCA Crim 1033; [2002] 2 Cr. App. R. 29, it was held that the ambit of
the offence was sufficiently well-defined for the purposes of art.7 of the ECHR (§ 16-130); that
article does not outlaw the gradual clarification of the rules of criminal liability through
judicial interpretation from case to case, provided that the resultant development is consistent
with the essence of the offence and could reasonably be foreseen; the offence in question had
been through such a process of elucidation since Vieones, above. But there is a need for caution
if the ambit of the offence is to be enlarged; it had to be done on a step-by-step basis, not with
one large leap: Clark, above (at p.369); and DPP v SK [2016] EWHCG 837 (Admin); 181 J.P.
197, DC.
B. ACTS CAPABLE OF CONSTITUTING THE OFFENCE
(1) Introduction
Any act or course of conduct tending and intended to interfere with the course of public 28-2
justice will amount to the offence; but the offence should only be charged where there are seri-
ous aggravating features: Sookoo [2002] EWCA Crim 800; The Times, 10 April 2002; and Kenny
[2013] EWCA Crim 1; [2013] 1 Cr. App. R. 23 (breach of restraint order should only be
charged as perverting the course of justice where there are serious aggravating features). Such
i atutory provisions or amount to contempt of court. The
examples given below are not ve, but represent those acts most frequently encountered
in this area of the common law. See also Selvage [1982] Q.B. 372 at 379, 380; (1981) 73 Cr.
App. R. 333 at 339, 340, CA, and DPP v SK, § 28-17a.
(2) False allegations
Conspiracy to charge a man falsely with any crime has long been indictable: Macdaniel’s case 28-3
(1755) 19 St.Tr. 745; and Rispal (1762) 3 Burr. 1320. It seems immate whether the
conspiracy proceeds so far as actually indicing the person falsely accused; and if the object of
the conspiracy is extortion, the truth or falsity of the charge is immaterial: Hollingberry (1825)
4B. & C. 329.
The course of public justice includes the process of criminal inv
viduals, identified or not, to the risk of arrest, imprisonment pending trial and wrongful
jon and I punishment by making a false allegation of crime is to proudice the course of
public justice; re
be greater where the false allegation i is capable of identifi
even where it is not so capable if the alleged offence is d
justify a significant police investigati
ed nature that there is no such risk, or no more than a theoretical risk, it may be more
te to prefer a charge of wasting police time, contrary to s.5(2) of the CLA 1967 (§ 28-
199): Cotter, § 28-1. See also Rowell (1977) 65 Cr. App. R. 174, CA (a charge of wasting police
time is scarcely an appropriate way to deal with exposing individuals to the risk of arrest,
imprisonment pending trial and possible wrongful conviction); and C [2007] EWCA Crim
2551; [2008] Crim. L.R. 394 (rarely appropriate merely to caution someone who made a false
rape allegation). Where the false allegation is made against an individual who is in fact dead,
the appropriate charge is attempting to pervert the course of justice: Brown (VJ) [2004] EWCA.
Crim 744; [2004] Crim. L.R. 665, approving Bailey [1956] N.I. 15 at 26.
3135
RLIT0000520
RLIT0000520
28-3
28, Orrences acainst Punic Justice
As to intent, what has to be proved is that the person making the false allegation intended
that it should be taken seriously by the police; it is not necessary to prove an intention that
anybody should actually be arrested, etc.: Colter, above.
In A [2010] EWCA Crim 2913, it was recognised, on an appeal against sentence, that the of-
fence extends to the retraction of a truthful allegation of crime or of truthful evidence. The
court said that there is a distinct public interest in the investigation and, if appropriate, the
prosecution and conviction of those who have committed crime.
(3) Perjury
28-4 = The fact that a person has either given false information to investigating officers or has com-
mitted perjury (denying on oath the truth of what he told the investigating officers) cannot of
itself found a charge of attempting to pervert the course of public justice in relation to the
prosecution he gave information about or evidence in. If perjury cannot be proved, the
prosecution cannot be allowed to circumvent the statutory safeguard, as to the proof of falsity,
by charging attempting to pervert: Txang Ping-Nam v R. (1982) 74 Cr. App. R. 139, PC.
(4) Concealment of evidence
28-5 = The offence may be committed where acts are done with the intention of concealing the fact
that a crime has been committed, although no proceedings in respect of it are pending or have
commenced: Sharpe and Stringer (1938) 26 Cr. App. R. 122, CCA; and see Wilde [1960] Crim.
L.R. 116, Assizes (Slade J) (agreement by two or more persons to conceal knowledge of criminal
offence itself a criminal offence). See further the cases cited at § 28-22.
The offence is not wide enough to take in the condua of a motorist who left the scene of an
ident in order to avoid being breathalysed; it was difficult to characterise the mere removal
of himself and his vehicle as the concealment of evidence: Clark [2003] EWCA Crim 991;
[2003] R.T.R. 27. See also Jabber [2006] EWCA Crim 2694 (mere escape from scene of c
and subsequent denial of involvement insufficient to prove concealment).
(5) Obstructing police
28-6 = Deliberate and intentional action taken with a view to frustrating statutory procedures
required of the police (e.g. breath test procedures) can amount to the offence (Britton [1973]
R.TR. 502, CA), even where the initial arrest may have been unlawful (Spratt [2007] 8 N.Z.L.R.
810, NZCA).
(6) Assisting offender to evade arrest
28-7 A person who does an act intending to assist another to evade lawful arrest, with knowledge
that the other is wanted by the police as a suspect, is guilty of attempting to pervert the cours
of justice: Thomas and Ferguson (1979) 68 Cr. App. R. 275, CA.
See also the offence contrary to s.4(1) of the CLA 1967 (§ 18-61) (a disadvantage of which is
that it requires proof that the person assisted committed an arrestable offence).
(7) Abuse of police discretion
28-8 Police officers who corruptly receive rewards to hinder prosecutions, by not bringing offend-
ers before the courts or by warning persons of intended prosecutions, may be charged with
“conspiracy to obstruct the course of public justice”; Hammersley (1958) 42 Cr. App. R. 207,
CCA. However, mere failure on the part of a police officer to pursue a matter with a view to
prosecution is not necessarily an offence. There is an undoubted discretion in a police officer
not to pursue a matter although there is clear evidence of an offence having been committed.
This is certainly so in trivial cases, such as riding a bicycle at night without lights or failing to
sign a driving licence. However, whether a discretion existed in any particular case is eminently
a matter for a jury to decide. For a police officer to be convicted of an offence of conduct tend-
ing and intended to pervert the course of justice, it must be proved not only that there was no
room for the exercise of discretion on the particular facts, but also that the defendant knew
3136