Hewlett, R. v

Hewlett, R. v

The trial judge was correct to find that 'pikey' could refer to a racial group and to reject the submission of no case to answer; the evidence and directions given to the jury were sufficient to support the convictions; there was no judicial bias or ineffective assistance of counsel; and the grounds of appeal were unarguable.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Applicant: Karl Richard Hewlett
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
renewed application for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Racially Aggravated Harassment, Witness Intimidation, Appeals Procedure
Criminal Law Racially Aggravated Harassment Witness Intimidation Appeals Procedure

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Karl Richard Hewlett

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the term 'pikey' is capable of referring to a racial group for the purposes of section 31(1)(b) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998
  2. 2 Whether the conviction for attempted witness intimidation was safe
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge's interventions and management of evidence were appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was correct to find that 'pikey' could refer to a racial group and to reject the submission of no case to answer; the evidence and directions given to the jury were sufficient to support the convictions; there was no judicial bias or ineffective assistance of counsel; and the grounds of appeal were unarguable.

Court Disposition

renewed application for leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • applicant to pay reasonable costs of the transcript in the sum of £40