AG -v- X [2014] JRC 083A (28 March 2014)

AG -v- X [2014] JRC 083A (28 March 2014)

There was no breach of Code C because the police, having referred the Defendant for medical assessment and received confirmation he was fit for interview without an appropriate adult, had no reasonable suspicion of mental vulnerability at the time. The confession was reliable, as the Defendant demonstrated...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2014] JRC 083A
Parties
Defendant: The Defendant; Prosecution: The Crown
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
28 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Voir Dire on Admissibility of Confession/interview Evidence
Outcome
Interview evidence admissible
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Confession, Police Interview Procedures, Mental Vulnerability, Code C Compliance, Fairness of Proceedings
Criminal Law Evidence Law Admissibility of Confession Police Interview Procedures Mental Vulnerability Code C Compliance Fairness of Proceedings

Source-derived case record

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Defendant

Defendant

The Crown

Prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Voir Dire on Admissibility of Confession/interview Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the police interview of the Defendant was inadmissible due to lack of an appropriate adult under Code C
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant was mentally vulnerable such that special safeguards were required
  3. 3 Whether the confession was likely to be unreliable under Article 74 of the Police Procedures and Criminal Evidence (Jersey) Law 2003

Ratio Decidendi

There was no breach of Code C because the police, having referred the Defendant for medical assessment and received confirmation he was fit for interview without an appropriate adult, had no reasonable suspicion of mental vulnerability at the time. The confession was reliable, as the Defendant demonstrated understanding and resistance to suggestive questioning, and the absence of an appropriate adult did not render the confession unreliable or the proceedings unfair.

Court Disposition

Interview evidence admissible

Orders

  • The question and answer interview is admissible and may be put before the jury, subject to redaction of prejudicial material.