Her Majesty's Advocate v. McLean [2000] ScotHC 116( 05 October 2000)

Her Majesty's Advocate v. McLean [2000] ScotHC 116( 05 October 2000)

The fact that the accused made an incriminating statement under section 172 does not automatically render inadmissible the evidence obtained during a subsequent interview under caution, provided the interview is conducted fairly and independently. The accused's right to a fair trial under Article 6 ECHR is not infringed in these circumstances, and the transcript of the interview is admissible.

Parties
Prosecutor: Her Majesty's Advocate; Accused: Barry McLean
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Ruling on Evidentiary Objection During Trial
Outcome
objection repelled
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Self Incrimination, Right to Fair Trial, Road Traffic Offences, Section 172 Road Traffic Act 1988, European Convention on Human Rights Article 6
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Admissibility of Evidence Self Incrimination Right to Fair Trial Road Traffic Offences Section 172 Road Traffic Act 1988 European Convention on Human Rights Article 6

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Advocate

Prosecutor

Barry McLean

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Ruling on Evidentiary Objection During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence obtained during a police interview under caution is inadmissible due to a prior self-incriminating statement made under section 172 of the Road Traffic Act 1988
  2. 2 Whether the accused's right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights was infringed by the use of section 172 procedure

Ratio Decidendi

The fact that the accused made an incriminating statement under section 172 does not automatically render inadmissible the evidence obtained during a subsequent interview under caution, provided the interview is conducted fairly and independently. The accused's right to a fair trial under Article 6 ECHR is not infringed in these circumstances, and the transcript of the interview is admissible.

Court Disposition

objection repelled

Orders

  • The objection to the admissibility of the interview transcript is repelled.