PROCURATOR FISCAL, JEDBURGH v. BRENDA DEVENEY [2014] ScotHC HCJAC_3 (04 December 2013)

PROCURATOR FISCAL, JEDBURGH v. BRENDA DEVENEY [2014] ScotHC HCJAC_3 (04 December 2013)

The sheriff's decision to desert the diet simpliciter was premature; fairness and oppression should be determined at the conclusion of proceedings unless the case is exceptional and blatant, which this was not. The communication between the witness and prosecutor did not taint the evidence or prejudice the respondent's right to a fair trial, especially as the relevant facts were agreed in the joint minute and the email exchange was available to all parties.

Citation
[2014] ScotHC HCJAC_3
Parties
Complainer: Procurator Fiscal, Jedburgh; Respondent: Brenda Deveney
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
04 December 2013
Procedural Posture
Bill of Advocation / Appeal Against Sheriff's Decision to Desert Diet Simpliciter
Outcome
bill of advocation passed
Legal Topics
Fair Trial, Oppression, Witness Communication, Article 6 ECHR
Criminal Law Human Rights Fair Trial Oppression Witness Communication Article 6 ECHR

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

Parties

Procurator Fiscal, Jedburgh

Complainer

Brenda Deveney

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Bill of Advocation / Appeal Against Sheriff's Decision to Desert Diet Simpliciter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether communication between witness and prosecutor during trial prejudiced the fairness of proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the sheriff's decision to desert the diet simpliciter was premature
  3. 3 Whether article 6 ECHR rights were breached

Ratio Decidendi

The sheriff's decision to desert the diet simpliciter was premature; fairness and oppression should be determined at the conclusion of proceedings unless the case is exceptional and blatant, which this was not. The communication between the witness and prosecutor did not taint the evidence or prejudice the respondent's right to a fair trial, especially as the relevant facts were agreed in the joint minute and the email exchange was available to all parties.

Court Disposition

bill of advocation passed

Orders

  • case remitted to sheriff to proceed as accords