Episode 10 - Defence Case Part 1 - Cut-Throat Defences, Contempt of Court, No Case to Answer

In Episode 10, we move through the remainder of the prosecution case against our three defendants, Aidan Johnson, Bianca Jones & Conor Williams, all of whom are accused of murdering 23 year old Daniel Clarke outside Bradley's Nightclub in the early hours one Saturday morning in late January. The prosecution are still to call the next main prosecution witness, Ethan Green, but - the last we knew - he wasn’t too keen on helping, and the fact that a warrant was issued for his arrest to bring him to court - whether he liked it or not - may not help matters. We’ll see. What does it mean to be competent to be a witness? What does it mean to be compellable? When can a witness refuse to answer questions? And what can happen if a witness simply refuses to play ball? How does the prosecution present agreed evidence? Why is a defendant’s police interview presented as part of the prosecution case? And why is the record of the police interview edited before it is shown to the jury? On top of all that, Ivy Jewell, Conor’s barrister, is wrestling with Conor’s revelation about Bianca, and we’ll find out what approach Ivy now takes in her client’s defence. What is a cut-throat defence and how does it usually play out? And, after the prosecution case, comes the defence case unless, as we’ll see, the barristers for each defendant can do something to bring the case to an early conclusion - which means we’ll go into detail about what’s known as a Submission of No Case to Answer. If you want to catch up on what’s led us to where we are now, from the scene of the alleged crime and the defendants' arrest in Episode 1, to the opening of the prosecution case in Episode 7 and the examination-in-chief and cross-examination of the first witness in Episodes 8 and 9, then please go back to the beginning and discover how this case has developed from the outset. As ever, thank you for listening. NOTES Throughout this podcast I have referred to legislation, cases and to further information and reading. Please refer to the links in the Legal Notes below to access this information yourself. You will also find a list of the characters in this podcast below to help you. CHARACTERS Defendants - Aidan Johnson - (visually described at the scene as white, dark hair and a pink shirt) Bianca Jones - (visually described at the scene as white, slim, wearing a green top and with long dark hair) Conor Williams - (visually described at the scene as black, short hair, white t-shirt and stocky build) Prosecution Barrister - Keith Lowe Defence Barristers - Gabriella Hadden - representing Aidan Henry Irwin - representing Bianca Ivy Jewell - representing Conor Defence Solicitors - Georgina Hale - representing Aidan Holly Ibsen - representing Bianca Ramesh Jayanshankar - representing Conor The Deceased - Daniel Clarke - (visually described as having bright blond hair and dark clothing) Main Prosecution witnesses - Ethan Green (friend of Daniel Clarke) Finn Hawkins (friend of Daniel Clarke) LEGAL NOTES Competence to give Evidence - s.53 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 - Competence of witnesses to give evidence https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/23/section/53 Exceptions to Compellability - s.80 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 - Competence and compellability of accused's spouse or civil partner https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/60/section/80/enacted Agreed Facts - s.10 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967 - Proof by formal admission https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/80/section/10 Hearsay - Interests of Justice - s.114(1)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 - Admissibility of hearsay evidence https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/44/section/114 Submission of No Case to Answer - Criminal Procedure Rule 25.9(2)(e) - Procedure and basic test for a submission of no case to answer https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/759/rule/25.9/made R v Galbraith [1981] 2 All ER 1060 - the case which sets out the detailed approach to submissions of no case to answer (not publicly available but helpful summary on Wikipedia) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_case_to_answer R v Craig and Bentley (1952) - Derek Bentley Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derek_Bentley ADDITIONAL READING - DEFENCE-BARRISTER.CO.UK For additional detailed reading on many aspects of what is covered throughout this series, please go to Defence-Barrister.co.uk https://www.defence-barrister.co.uk written by Chris Kessling, Criminal Barrister. PLEASE NOTE: It is a pleasure to hear from you and to answer your questions, but due to the matters set out below please understand that there are certain questions I am unable to respond to: Please bear in mind that this podcast is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. I am unable to provide legal advice on your specific case. If you require legal advice about a specific case or legal problem it is vital that you seek legal advice from a legal professional, such as a barrister or solicitor. Due to contempt of court provisions and other legal requirements, I am limited in what I can say about ongoing legal proceedings in any court. The story, all names, characters, and incidents portrayed in this podcast are fictitious. No identification with actual persons (living or deceased), places, buildings, and products is intended or should be inferred. Thank you for your understanding. CONTACT Email: podcast@defence-barrister.co.uk X https://twitter.com/defencebar Instagram https://www.instagram.com/defencebar/ COPYRIGHT Music and content created and recorded by Chris Kessling © 2024. All rights reserved. External links to (and provision of information from) .gov.uk websites, the sentencing council website (sentencingcouncil.org.uk), the Judiciary website (judiciary.uk) and other information subject to Crown copyright is provided under the terms of the open goverment licence - https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/