HM Advocate v Sheridan & Anor [2011] ScotHC HCJ_01 (18 November 2011)

HM Advocate v Sheridan & Anor [2011] ScotHC HCJ_01 (18 November 2011)

Despite the existence of prejudicial publicity, the safeguards of the focusing effect of listening to evidence and special judicial directions are sufficient to remove the risk of prejudice, ensuring a fair trial is available to the accused.

Citation
[2011] ScotHC HCJ_01
Parties
Prosecutor: Her Majesty's Advocate; First Accused: Thomas Sheridan; Second Accused: Gail Sheridan
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
18 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Preliminary Plea and Directions to Jury
Outcome
Preliminary pleas repelled and devolution minutes refused; trial to proceed with special jury directions.
Legal Topics
Prejudicial Publicity, Fair Trial, Jury Directions, Article 6 ECHR, Perjury, Devolution Minute
Criminal Law Human Rights Law Prejudicial Publicity Fair Trial Jury Directions Article 6 ECHR Perjury Devolution Minute

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Advocate

Prosecutor

Thomas Sheridan

First Accused

Gail Sheridan

Second Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Preliminary Plea and Directions to Jury

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prejudicial pre-trial publicity rendered a fair trial impossible under article 6 ECHR
  2. 2 Whether the Crown failed to take adequate steps to prevent prejudicial publicity
  3. 3 Whether special jury directions could mitigate risk of prejudice

Ratio Decidendi

Despite the existence of prejudicial publicity, the safeguards of the focusing effect of listening to evidence and special judicial directions are sufficient to remove the risk of prejudice, ensuring a fair trial is available to the accused.

Court Disposition

Preliminary pleas repelled and devolution minutes refused; trial to proceed with special jury directions.

Orders

  • Preliminary pleas in bar of trial repelled
  • Devolution minutes refused