Introduction: Participatory Requirements and Rights

This book explores the changes to the defendant’s role as a participant in the criminal process and the ramifications of penalising a defendant’s non-cooperation, particularly its effect on the adversarial system. The increase in demand for participation has resulted in the imposition of requirements on defendants to actively participate, backed by penalties for non-cooperation. These requirements derive from legislation and have been given effect by the courts. The purpose of this book is to critically examine the participatory role of the defendant during the pre-trial and trial stages of the criminal process, from charge to verdict, and to assess the impact which requiring active participation has had on the nature of criminal procedure. The position taken is that it is wrong to require defendants to actively participate in proceedings against themselves. This argument is based on a broad approach to fair trial rights and a normative position, or theory, which holds that the criminal process should operate as a mechanism for calling the state to account for its accusations and request for official condemnation and punishment of the accused. When fair trial rights are interpreted broadly, as they ought to be, they allow defendants to take a passive role, while challenging the state and holding it to account for its accusations of criminal wrongdoing. Moreover, if defendants are to be treated as free and dignified citizens of a liberal democracy, as they ought to be, they must be at liberty to choose whether or not to actively participate in criminal proceedings. This normative theory of the criminal process not only provides a basis for the argument against requiring active participation, but also provides a framework, or yardstick, from which to approach and examine wider developments in criminal procedure and the law of evidence

Defence participation through pre-trial disclosure: issues and implications

The Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 imposed, for the first time in the history of English criminal procedure, a general duty on the defence to disclose the details of its case ahead of trial. These disclosure requirements have been augmented by the case management provisions of the Criminal Procedure Rules and judicial responses to the perceived need to tackle ambush defences. The defence disclosure regime has changed the role of the defence as a participant in the criminal process. It raises issues of principle in terms of its effect on fai r trial rights and has implications for the nature of English criminal procedure. This article examines these issues and implications; it reveals that the defence disclosure regime has caused a shift in the English criminal process further away from an adv ersarial style contest towards a participatory model of procedure

Unfit to Plead or Unfit to Testify? R v Orr [2016] EWCA Crim 889

Discusses the scope and interpretation of the test for unfitness to plead, the stage at which a finding of unfitness may be made, and the interplay between the unfitness to plead process and s.35 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

Racially aggravated offences: when does section 145 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 apply?

No description supplie

Penalising defendant non-cooperation in the criminal process and the implications for English criminal procedure

Requirements for the defendant to actively participate in the criminal process have been increasing in recent years such that the defendant can now be penalised for his non-cooperation. This thesis explores the procedural implications of penalising a defendant’s non-cooperation, particularly its effect on the English adversarial system. This thesis uses three key examples: 1) limitations placed on the privilege against self-incrimination, 2) adverse inferences drawn from a defendant’s silence, and 3) adverse inferences drawn from defence non-disclosure. The thesis explores how laws regarding the privilege against self-incrimination, the right to silence and pre-trial disclosure came to be reformed such that the defendant can now be penalised for his non-cooperation, and how these laws have been approached by the courts. A normative theory of criminal procedure is developed in the thesis and is used to challenge the idea of penalising defendant non-cooperation in the criminal process. The theory proposes that the criminal process should operate as a mechanism for calling the state to account for its accusations and request for official condemnation and punishment of the accused. Within this framework, the defendant should be free to choose whether or not to cooperate and participate throughout the process. The theory rests upon a broad interpretation of the presumption of innocence, the right to a fair trial, and a conception of the relationship between citizen and state. Conversely, the thesis finds that, by placing participatory requirements on the defendant and penalising him for his non-cooperation, a participatory model of procedure has developed. This model relies on the active participation of the defendant in pursuit of efficient fact finding. The participatory model is far removed from England’s history of adversarialism and, unfortunately, has less regard for legitimacy, fairness and respect for defence rights

Case ReportsVulvar Lipoma: Is it so Rare?

Vulvar lipoma is said to be so rare that only a few cases have been reported. We present two cases of vulvar lipoma that were diagnosed within six months in our centre in a 28 year-old para 2 and 35 year-old para 1 woman both of whom presented with slow-growing masses in the vulva. A detailed discussion of the clinical features and current management options are outlined, with emphasis on the need to subject all excised lesions to histopathological evaluation; to ensure accurate diagnosis and differentiate this benign swelling from cystic swellings and malignant neoplasms in the vulva.Keywords: Vulva, lipoma, benign neoplasm, surgical excisionGhana Medical Journal, September 2011, Volume 45, Number

‘It’s Kinda Punishment’: Tandem Logics and Penultimate Power in the Penal Voluntary Sector for Canadian Youth

This paper draws on original empirical research in Ontario, Canada which analyses penal voluntary sector practice with youth in conflict with the law. I illustrate how youth penal voluntary sector practice (YPVS) operates alongside, or in tandem with the statutory criminal justice system. I argue that examining the PVS and the statutory criminal justice system simultaneously, or in tandem, provides fuller understandings of PVS inclusionary (and exclusionary) control practices (Tomczak and Thompson 2017). I introduce the concept of penultimate power, which demonstrates the ability of PVS workers to trigger criminal justice system response toward a young person in conflict with the law. My novel concepts of tandem logics and penultimate power are useful for understanding PVS practice, explaining how seemingly contradictory approaches across state and ‘community’ organizations not only co-exist, but depend upon the tandem relationship between the PVS and the statutory criminal justice system

Evidence-based Kernels: Fundamental Units of Behavioral Influence

This paper describes evidence-based kernels, fundamental units of behavioral influence that appear to underlie effective prevention and treatment for children, adults, and families. A kernel is a behavior–influence procedure shown through experimental analysis to affect a specific behavior and that is indivisible in the sense that removing any of its components would render it inert. Existing evidence shows that a variety of kernels can influence behavior in context, and some evidence suggests that frequent use or sufficient use of some kernels may produce longer lasting behavioral shifts. The analysis of kernels could contribute to an empirically based theory of behavioral influence, augment existing prevention or treatment efforts, facilitate the dissemination of effective prevention and treatment practices, clarify the active ingredients in existing interventions, and contribute to efficiently developing interventions that are more effective. Kernels involve one or more of the following mechanisms of behavior influence: reinforcement, altering antecedents, changing verbal relational responding, or changing physiological states directly. The paper describes 52 of these kernels, and details practical, theoretical, and research implications, including calling for a national database of kernels that influence human behavior

Accurate prenatal discrimination of placenta accreta spectrum from uterine dehiscence is necessary to ensure optimal management

Uterine scar dehiscence with underlying placenta is often misdiagnosed as placenta accreta spectrum both prenatally and intraoperatively due to the absence of myometrial tissue in the area. Misdiagnosis generates obstetric anxiety and results in overtreatment which carries a risk of iatrogenic injury. We present a case of the antenatal diagnosis of uterine dehiscence in a 36-year-old woman with a history of two caesarean deliveries and a low-lying placenta. We further describe the sonographic features useful for differentiating this condition from placenta accreta spectrum in instances where the placenta lies under an area of full thickness uterine scar dehiscence