Biddle, R v

Biddle, R v

The trial judge acted within his broad discretion in limiting the intermediary's role and in giving the adverse inference direction, as there was no evidence that the appellant was unable to participate fully or that the absence of an intermediary caused him not to give evidence.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Joseph Biddle
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Intermediaries, Adverse Inference, Vulnerable Defendants, Fair Trial, Sexual Offences
Criminal Law Intermediaries Adverse Inference Vulnerable Defendants Fair Trial Sexual Offences

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Joseph Biddle

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in limiting the use of an intermediary to the giving of evidence only
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in giving an adverse inference direction under section 35 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge acted within his broad discretion in limiting the intermediary's role and in giving the adverse inference direction, as there was no evidence that the appellant was unable to participate fully or that the absence of an intermediary caused him not to give evidence.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed