text:
Strona główna Criminal Law: Text, Cases, and Materials
Criminal Law: Text, Cases, and Materials
This edition of Criminal Law: Text, Cases, and Materials offers an exceptional depth of analysis, a wealth of cases and materials all set within the theoretical context of criminal law.
The effective two-part structure of each chapter in the book - the first part explaining the law as it is, the second examining the theoretical aspects - ensures that readers not only gain a secure understanding of the law itself but also acquire a fundamental appreciation of the surrounding philosophical and ethical debates. Important theoretical material is made accessible to students through a particularly engaging writing style. The author's clarity of expression brings the subject to life and places the law in context.
This text is an essential and complete resource for all those wanting to get to grips with the always fascinating and sometimes challenging area of criminal law today.
Online Resource Centre
This book is accompanied by an Online Resource Centre, offering updates to the law following publication, useful weblinks, and guidance on answering questions in the book. Video footage of the author talking about the book and his approach to criminal law provides the perfect introduction to your studies.
Edycja: 5
Wydawca: Oxford University Press, USA
Pobierz (pdf, 14.28 MB)
Czytaj online
defendant2360
offence1800
defence1220
offences1116
crim865
mens rea708
jury697
rape522
crim lr516
cr app510
theft441
ewca crim347
actus reus341
bodily harm327
manslaughter327
wlr315
convicted312
prosecution294
intercourse292
defences284
recklessness274
crimes268
strict liability249
duress247
causation231
negligence228
sexual intercourse215
dpp212
sexual offences209
appellant192
grievous bodily183
house of lords178
reckless176
criminal liability174
grievous bodily harm173
subjective172
dishonest168
liable167
oup166
provocation166
intoxication165
homicide160
accomplice160
voluntary159
burglary157
unlawful152
dishonesty151
statutory146
commentators142
insanity141
Semantic Externalism
Jesper Kallestrup
Criminal Law Statutes 2012-2013
All statute books are not the same.
Only Blackstone's Statutes have a
tradition of trust and quality built on a
rock-solid reputation for accuracy,
reliability, and authority.
'Blackstone's Statutes . . . have been essential for
my exam success . . . they're clear, well-structured
and comprehensive, allowing easy referencing while
studying and therefore peace of mind in exams.'
✓ thoroughly peer reviewed
✓ content based on detailed market
Yubing Zhu, Student, University of Cambridge
✓ edited by subject specialists
employing decades of experience
and judgement
✓ 91% of students who have used
Blackstone's Statutes would
recommend them*
Blackstone's Statutes are the original
and best. Setting the standard by which
other statute books are measured.
Emily Davis, Student, Brunel Law School
Buy yours from your campus bookshop,
online, or direct from OUP.
Core subjects £14.99
Optional subjects £16.99
Access further statute-related online materials and
resources here: www.oxfordtextbooks.co.uk/orc/statutes/
Blackstone's Statutes have been trusted in over a
million exams—why take a chance on anything else?
www.oxfordtextbooks.co.uk/statutes
* Survey of over 100 students
feedback from law courses
'Easy to use and great to have as a study aid, I
would definitely not have achieved the marks I
wanted without Blackstone's Statute books.'
Text, Cases, and Materials
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Oxford University Press 2012
First Edition copyright 2004
Second Edition copyright 2006
Th ird Edition copyright 2008
Fourth Edition copyright 2010
Fift h Edition copyright 2012
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Public sector information reproduced under Open Government Licence v1.0
(http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/open-government-licence.htm)
Crown Copyright material reproduced with the permission of the
Controller, HMSO (under the terms of the Click Use licence)
Printed by Ashford Colour Press Ltd, Gosport, Hampshire
For Kirsten, Laurel, Joanna, and Darcy
Key revisions in the 5th edition include—
• A discussion of the law on omissions after R v Evans
• Detailed examination of the new defence of loss of control
• A reworked chapter on the law of accessories
• The new law on diminished responsiblity
• A new section on emotional harms
• Developments in the law on fraud
• Recent case law on self-defence
Usually, students greatly enjoy criminal law. The facts of the cases are readily understandable and provide a revealing insight into the bizarre and grotesque. But many students miss
out on the intellectual fascination that the subject has to offer. This is in part because much
of the theoretical material on criminal law has been presented with such sophistication that
it is inaccessible to students. It is one of the primary aims of this book to make the theoretical
material on criminal law more readily comprehensible to undergraduates. Therefore, each
chapter (apart from the first) has two parts. The first part sets out the law, with extracts from
the leading cases. The second part describes some of the theoretical material, extracting
some of the writing from leading commentators. The hope is that the reader will have a secure grasp of the law itself, but also an introduction to the complex philosophical and ethical
debates concerning criminal law.
The selection of materials in books of this kind is far harder than might be thought. The
articles and books which might be the leading authorities on the topics are sometimes not
readily susceptible to having short passages extracted. I have therefore included throughout
the book suggestions for further reading. These will enable a reader who wishes to pursue a
particular issue in further detail to do so.
The book seeks to set out the law at 1 September 2011.
Exeter College, Oxford
AUTHOR'S APPROACH
Two part chapter structure
This book takes a unique approach to the study of criminal law. Each chapter is split into two
parts. The first part looks at what the law actually is at the moment—the 'black letter' law—
and provides many extracts from key cases. The second part looks at the theory behind the
law, analyses the law, and provides critical and analytical extracts from secondary sources,
including articles and books.
In order to relate the black letter part of each chapter to the theoretical part, the author
has provided clear cross-references throughout the text. These are indicated in the text by
the use of arrows with numbers to help you find the corresponding reference, for example,
→1 and ←1. Therefore, when studying the black letter law, readers can refer forwards in the
chapter to the theoretical discussion of this aspect of the law, and vice versa by finding the
corresponding number.
Central issues
At the start of each chapter, the author has provided a list of the central issues that will be
covered, outlining the major areas of discussion and issues within each topic.
The author has provided lists of further reading interspersed throughout the text so that
readers can quickly and easily locate relevant additional sources on particular aspects
of law.
Definitions of key legal terms and concepts are provided and highlighted throughout the
text.
Questions and examination tips
Questions both to test the reader's understanding of the actual law, as well as more theoretical questions, are included throughout each chapter. Examination tips are also provided,
including resources such as flowcharts to help determine what sort of crime has been committed, and guidelines on approaching specific questions or scenarios.
| ix
This book is accompanied by an Online Resource Centre at www.oxfordtextbooks.co.uk/
orc/herringcriminal5e/. This provides regular updates to the law following publication—a
particularly important resource in this fast-moving area. A selection of key annotated web
links is also offered, guiding readers towards useful websites, along with online guidance on
answering a selection of the questions posed in the text. Questions with online guidance are
highlighted in the text by the following: 'For guidance on answering this question, please
visit the Online Resource Centre that accompanies this book: www.oxfordtextbooks.co.uk/
orc/herringcriminal5e/'. In addition to this, a test bank of interactive multiple choice questions is provided as a lecturer resource.
Finally, there is a video of the author talking about the study of criminal law and his
approach to the subject.
OUTLINE TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 An introduction to criminal law
2 Actus reus: the conduct element
3 Mens rea: the mental element
4 Strict liability
5 Homicide
6 Non-fatal non-sexual offences against the person
7 Sexual offences
8 Theft, handling, and robbery
9 Fraud
10 Burglary and blackmail
11 Criminal damage
12 Defences
13 The criminal liability of corporations
14 Inchoate offences
15 Complicity
Source Acknowledgements
Table of Legislation
Table of Secondary Legislation
1 What is a crime?
2 The role of criminal law
3 The statistics of criminal behaviour
4 'Principles' of criminal law
4.1 The principle of legality
4.2 The principle of responsibility
4.3 The principle of minimal criminalization
4.4 The principle of proportionality
4.5 The principle of fair labelling
5 Proposals for a Criminal Code
5.1 Arguments in favour of a Code
5.2 Disadvantages of the Code
6 What conduct should be criminal?
6.1 Autonomy
6.2 The harm principle
6.3 Practicality
7 Culpability
7.1 The subjectivism/objectivism debate
8 The victim in criminal law
9 The criminal process
10 Criminal law and the Human Rights Act 1998
10.1 The significance of the Human Rights Act 1998
10.2 The important articles in the European Convention
10.3 Potential consequences of the HRA on the criminal law
11 Critical criminal law
| xiii
12 Feminist legal thought
13 Punishment
13.1 Consequentialist theories of punishment
13.2 Non-consequentialist theories
13.3 Mixed theories
14 Sentencing
15 Concluding thoughts
I the law
1 Distinguishing the component elements of a crime
2 The voluntary act 'requirement'
2.1 Omissions
2.2 Situational offences
2.3 Liability for the acts of other people
3 Causation
3.1 Factual or 'but for' causation
3.2 The key test for legal causation
3.3 Acts of third parties breaking the chain of causation
3.4 Omissions of third parties breaking the chain of causation
3.5 Acts of the victim breaking the chain
3.6 The 'thin skull' rule
3.7 A natural event ('Acts of God')
3.8 Intended results
II actus reus: theory
4 Classification of offences
5 The need for a voluntary act
5.1 Why might the law have a voluntary act requirement?
5.2 What is the 'voluntary act requirement'?
6 Omissions
6.1 Should the criminal law punish omissions?
7 Causation: should consequences matter?
7.1 Arguments against holding people responsible for the consequences
of their actions
7.2 Arguments that consequences do matter
8 Seeking a coherent approach to causation
8.1 'Causal minimalism'
8.2 Hart and Honoré
xiv |
8.3 Reasonable foreseeability
8.4 Natural consequences
8.5 Narrowness of causation approach
9 Concluding thoughts
1 The meaning of mens rea
2 Intention
2.1 The core meaning of intention
2.2 Borderline cases of intention
2.3 Intoxication and intent
3 Recklessness
3.1 Cunningham recklessness
3.2 Caldwell recklessness
4 Negligence
5 Gross negligence
6 Distinguishing between intention, recklessness, and negligence
7 Intoxication
7.1 Involuntary and voluntary intoxication
7.2 Offences of basic and specific intent
7.3 Stating the present law
8 Knowledge and belief
9 Transferred mens rea
10 Coincidence of actus reus and mens rea
10.1 'Exceptions' to the coincidence requirement
II mens rea theory
11 General discussion on mens rea
12 Choice/capacity/character theory
13 Subjective/objective
14 Normal meaning
15 Intent
15.1 Distinguishing indirect intention and direct intention
15.2 Is intention an issue of fact or an issue of moral responsibility?
16 Recklessness
16.1 Subjective and objective forms of recklessness and inadvertence
| xv
16.2 An insufficient regard for the interests of others: Victor Tadros
16.3 Practical indifference: Antony Duff
17 Negligence
17.1 Opposition to the use of negligence in criminal law
17.2 Support for the use of negligence in criminal law
18 Intoxication
18.1 Intoxication and crime
18.2 Alcoholism and drug dependency: illness or weakness?
18.3 Explaining the present law on intoxication
18.4 Alternatives to Majewski
19 Motive
19.1 Is motive relevant in the criminal law?
19.2 Arguments in favour of taking motive into account
19.3 Arguments against taking motive into account
20 The 'correspondence principle'
20.1 Which principle best reflects the law?
20.2 Which principle is most justifiable in theory?
21 Individualism and mens rea
1 What is a strict liability offence?
2 Which offences are strict liability?
3 When will a court not presume mens rea?
4 What mens rea will be presumed?
5 The Human Rights Act and strict liability offences
6 Common law defences and strict liability offences
7 Possession offences
II the theory of strict liability offences
8 The arguments for and against strict liability
8.1 Arguments for strict liability offences
8.2 Arguments against strict liability offences
8.3 Analysing the arguments
xvi |
2 Murder
2.1 Actus reus
2.2 Mens rea
3 Manslaughter: an introduction
4 Loss of control
4.1 The defendant lost self-control as a result of a qualifying trigger
4.2 Would a person with normal tolerance and self-restraint have acted as D did?
4.3 Loss of control and victims of domestic violence
5 Diminished responsibility
5.1 'Abnormality of mental functioning'
5.2 The effect of the abnormality of mental functioning
5.3 Explanation for the acts
5.4 Diminished responsibility and intoxication
6 Suicide pact
7 Mercy killing and euthanasia
8 Infanticide
9 Constructive manslaughter
9.1 An unlawful act
9.2 Dangerous act
9.3 Causation
10 Gross negligence manslaughter
10.1 A duty
10.2 A breach of a duty
10.3 Causing the death
10.4 Gross negligence
11 Subjective reckless manslaughter
12 Protecting life on the roads
12.1 Causing death by dangerous driving
12.2 Causing death by careless driving when under the influence
of drink or drugs
12.3 Causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving
12.4 Causing death by unlicensed, disqualified, or uninsured driving
12.5 Manslaughter and driving
13 Causing or allowing the death of a child or vulnerable adult
| xvii
II theoretical issues in homicide law
14 Homicide: the statistics
15 The structure of homicide
15.1 Creating a wide range of kinds of homicide
15.2 Leaving distinctions to sentencing
15.3 Distinguishing on the basis of the victims
15.4 Labelling the method of killing used
16 The actus reus of homicide
17 Non-homicidal killings
18 The mens rea for murder
18.1 The meaning of intention
18.2 Is intention the appropriate mens rea?
18.3 The fact that intention to cause grievous bodily harm is sufficient
19 Defining the mens rea for manslaughter
20 Loss of control
20.1 Theory
20.2 There must be a qualifying trigger
20.3 The objective requirement
20.4 The gendered nature of the defence
20.5 The case for the abolition of the defence
21 Diminished responsibility
21.1 Diminished responsibility in practice
21.2 The theoretical basis of the diminished responsibility defence
6 NON-FATAL NON-SEXUAL OFFENCES
2 Assault and battery
2.1 Assault
2.2 Battery
3 Assault occasioning actual bodily harm
4 Malicious wounding
5 Wounding with intent
6 Mixing and matching the offences
xviii |
7 Poisoning
7.1 The meaning of 'poison' or 'noxious substance'
7.2 The meaning of 'administer'
7.3 The meaning of 'maliciously'
7.4 The meaning of 'endangerment of life' or 'cause grievous bodily harm'
7.5 The meaning of 'with intent to injure, aggrieve or annoy'
8 Other assault crimes
9 Racially and religiously aggravated crimes
10 Protection from Harassment Act 1997
10.1 Section 1: Harassment
10.2 Section 4 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997
11 Threats offences
12 Transmitting disease
13 Consent and assault
13.1 To what offences against the person is consent a defence?
13.2 What is consent?
13.3 What if there is no consent but the defendant believes
that there is consent?
II theoretical issues on assaults
14 The true nature and extent of violent crime
15 The nature of an assault
16 Objections to and reform of the Offences Against
the Person Act 1861
17 Proposed reforms to the Offences Against the Person Act
18 Consent
18.1 Defence or actus reus?
18.2 The dispute over Brown
19 Emotional harm
20 Stalking
21 Transmitting disease and the criminal law
I the law on sexual offences
1.1 Who can commit rape?
| xix
1.2 Who can be the victim of rape?
1.3 What is penetration?
1.4 What is consent?
1.5 Mens rea: an intent to penetrate
1.6 Mens rea: the defendant does not reasonably believe that the victim consents
1.7 Intoxication and the law of rape
1.8 Assessment of the Sexual Offences Act 2003
2 Assault by penetration
3 Sexual assault
4 Causing sexual activity without consent
5 Preparatory offences
6 Sexual offences designed to protect children
6.1 Offences which are versions of the general offences
6.2 Offences designed specifically to protect children from sexual abuse
6.3 Abuse of position of trust offences
6.4 Familial child sex offences
6.5 Child prostitution and child pornography
7 Offences against those with a mental disorder
8 Prostitution and trafficking
9 Incest
10 Miscellaneous offences
II the theory of sexual offences
11 Background of sexual crimes
12 Statistics on rape
13 The nature of rape
13.1 The historical explanation
13.2 The autonomy explanation
13.3 Rape as violence
13.4 Rape as invasion of integrity
13.5 Rape as moral injury
13.6 The radical feminist explanation of rape
14 Consent and sexual activity
14.1 What is consent: is it objective or subjective?
14.2 What is consent: to waive or intend?
14.3 What is consent: is a failure to voice opposition consent?
14.4 Consent: what is the status of a mistaken consent?
14.5 Consent and pressure
14.6 Consent: intoxicated mistake
14.7 Should consent be enough?
xx |
15 Mens rea for rape
15.1 The intent-based view
15.2 The subjective recklessness view
15.3 The Morgan view
15.4 The negligence view: 'unreasonable belief'
15.5 The negligence view: 'unreasonable formation of belief'
15.6 Strict liability approach to rape
16 The actus reus of rape
1 Theft
1.1 Property
1.2 Belonging to another
1.3 Appropriation
1.4 Intention permanently to deprive
1.5 Dishonesty
2 Robbery
3 Assault with intent to rob
4 Handling stolen goods
4.1 It must be shown that the goods have already been stolen
4.2 It must be shown that the defendant handled the property
4.3 It must be shown that the defendant knew or believed that
the goods were stolen
4.4 The defendant was dishonest
5 Money laundering offences
II theft and theory
6 Introduction to property offences
6.1 In what way do property offences harm victims?
6.2 Structure of property offences
6.3 The civil law–criminal law interface
6.4 Theft: the statistics
6.5 What is property?
7 The debate over Gomez
7.1 The case for Gomez
7.2 The case against Gomez
8 The Hinks debate
8.1 The arguments against Hinks
9 Temporary appropriation
| xxi
10 Dishonesty
11 Robberies
12 Handling stolen goods
I the law on Fraud
1.1 Fraud by false representation
1.2 Fraud by failing to disclose information
1.3 Fraud by abuse of position
2 Section 6: fraud and possession offences
3 Obtaining services dishonestly
4 Conspiracy to defraud
5 Making off without payment: section 3 of the Theft Act 1978
5.1 Making off from the place where payment was expected
5.2 Goods supplied or services done
5.3 Without having paid as required or expected
5.5 Knowing that payment on the spot is required or expected of him
5.6 Intent to avoid payment
II the theory of FRAUD
6 The extent of fraud
7 The nature of fraud
8 The Fraud Act 2006
1 Burglary
1.1 Building or part of a building
1.2 Entry
xxii |
1.3 Trespasser
1.4 The mens rea for burglary
2 Aggravated burglary
3 Trespass with intent to commit a sexual offence
4 Blackmail
4.1 A demand
4.2 With a view to a gain or loss
4.3 Menaces
4.4 The demand must be unwarranted
II burglary and blackmail: theory
5 Burglary: theory
5.1 Burglary in practice
5.2 Why is burglary an offence?
6 Blackmail theory
6.1 The incidence of blackmail
6.2 Why is blackmail a crime?
I the law on criminal damage
1 Basic criminal damage
1.1 Damage
1.5 Defences
2 Arson
3 Aggravated criminal damage
4 Racially aggravated criminal damage
5 Computer crime: Computer Misuse Act 1990
5.1 Section 1: unauthorized access to computer material
5.2 Section 2: unauthorized access with intent
5.3 Section 3: unauthorized acts
II theoretical issues on criminal damage
6 Criminal damage theory
| xxiii
6.2 What is special about damaging property?
6.3 Should it be an offence to damage your own property?
6.4 The definition of damage
7 The theory of computer crimes
1 Private defence and the prevention of crime
1.1 The legal source of the defence
1.2 To what crimes is private defence a defence?
1.3 What needs to be shown to establish the defence?
1.4 What about defendants who think they are being attacked but are not?
1.5 Self-induced private defences
1.6 Excessive use of force
1.7 Has the Human Rights Act 1998 changed the law?
2 Necessity
2.1 The meaning of necessity
2.2 Cases denying the existence of a general defence of necessity
2.3 The limited defence of necessity at common law
2.4 Implied recognition of necessity
2.5 Duress of circumstances
3 Chastisement
5.2 To what crimes is duress a defence?
5.3 What are the elements of the defence of duress?
6 Coercion
7 Entrapment
8 Superior orders
9 Automatism
9.1 A complete loss of voluntary control
9.2 An external factor
9.3 The defendant was not at fault in causing the condition
10 Insanity
10.1 Insanity at the time of the alleged offence
10.2 A claim that the defendant was insane at the time of the trial
xxiv |
13.1 Children below the age of 10
13.2 A child aged 10 to 14
15 Mistake
15.1 A mistake which may negate mens rea
15.2 Mistakes and defences
15.3 Mistakes of law
II the theory of defences
16 Defining defences
16.1 The traditional approach
16.2 Alternatives to the traditional classification
16.3 Does any of this matter?
17 Justifications and excuses
17.1 Justifications
17.2 Excuses
17.3 Does the distinction between justifications and excuses really matter?
17.4 Should justifications be objective and excuses subjective?
17.5 Problems with justifications and excuses
18 Character, choice, and capacity
18.1 The capacity theory
18.2 The character theory
19 Determinism
20 The rejection of an overarching theory
21.1 Problems with the present law
21.2 Reform of the present law
22 Private defence
22.1 The moral basis of private defence
22.2 Mistaken private defence
23 Duress
24 Necessity
25 Issues which fall between the gaps of the defences
25.1 Kingston
25.2 Battered women
25.3 The Zeebrugge disaster
| xxv
13 THE CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF
I the law on corporate criminality
1 The difficulty in convicting companies of crimes
2 Corporate killing
3 Vicarious liability
3.1 What is vicarious liability?
3.2 Which crimes can be committed vicariously?
3.3 For whose act can the defendant be vicariously liable?
3.4 What mens rea must be proved?
II the theory of corporate liability
4 Theoretical issues in corporate liability
4.1 The reality of corporate crime
4.2 The clamour for corporate liability
4.3 Should a company be guilty of a crime?
4.4 If there is to be corporate crime, what form should it take?
I the law on inchoate offences
1 Inchoate offences
2 Attempt
2.3 Impossible attempts
2.4 Attempts and abandonment
3 Serious Crime Act 2007
4 Conspiracy
4.1 The nature of conspiracy
4.2 Statutory conspiracies
4.3 Impossibility and statutory conspiracies
4.4 Common law conspiracies
4.5 Impossibility and common law offences
II theory
xxvi |
6 The theory of criminal attempts
6.1 Why do we punish attempts?
6.2 'The problem of moral luck'
6.3 Actus reus of attempt
6.4 Mens rea for attempt
6.6 Reform of the law on attempts
7 Conspiracy theory
8 The rationale for the new Serious Crime Act offences
I the law of complicity
1 Principals and accomplices
1.1 Who is the principal?
1.2 'Innocent agency'
2 Complicity: the actus reus
2.1 Aiding
2.2 Abetting
2.3 Counselling
2.4 Procuring
2.5 Joint enterprise
2.6 Omissions and accomplice liability
3 Mens rea
3.1 Mens rea for accomplices
3.2 Summarizing the current law on accessories
3.3 The selling of dangerous items
4 Secondary participation and inchoate offences
5 Conviction of secondary party and acquittal of principal
6 Can a secondary party ever be guilty of a greater offence than
the principal?
7 Withdrawal by a secondary party
8 Accessories and victims
9 Assistance after the offence
II accessories and theory
10 General theories of accessorial liability
10.1 Derivative theory of accessorial liability
| xxvii
10.2 Does the theory explain the current law?
10.3 Causation and accomplice liability
10.4 Inchoate model
11 Theories of accessorial mens rea
11.1 Purpose
11.2 Recklessness
11.3 The accomplice's mens rea should be the same as that required
for the principal
12 The theory of joint enterprise
13 Actus reus issues
14 Withdrawal
15 Reform of the law
Appeal Cases
ALJR
Australian Law Journal Reports
All ER
All England Reports
Anti-social behaviour order
British Crime Survey
BHRC
Butterworths Human Rights Cases
BMLR
Butterworths Medico-Legal Reports
Battered Women's Syndrome
C&P
Craig & Phillips
Caldecott's Magistrates' and Settlement Cases
Commonwealth Arbitration Reports (Aust.)
Car & M
Carrington & Marshman's Nisi Prius Reports
Criminal Court of Appeal
Crown Cases Reserved
Cl & F
Clark & Finnelly's House of Lords Cases
Commonwealth Law Reports (Aust.)
CMAC
Courts-Martial Appeal Court
Cox CC
Cox's Criminal Cases
Cr App R Criminal Appeal Reports
Crim LR
Criminal Law Review
Dearsley & Bell
Divisional Court
Dominion Law Reports (Can.)
East's Term Reports, King's Bench
ECtHR
EHRR
European Human Rights Reports
EWCA
England and Wales Court of Appeal
EWHC
England and Wales High Court
Foster & Finlayson's Nisi Prius Reports
Family Court Reporter
HRLR
Human Rights Law Reports
Justice of the Peace Reports
King's Bench
Le & Ca
Leigh & Cave's Crown Cases Reserved
Lew CC
Lewin's Crown Cases Reserved
Law Reports (New South Wales)
Law Times Reports
Med LR
Medical Law Reports
Mod Rep
Modern Reports
Mood & R
Moody & Robinson's Nisi Prius Reports
Mood CC
Moody's Crown Cases Reserved
Northern Ireland Law Reports
NZLR
New Zealand Law Reports
P & CR
Property, Planning & Compensation Reports
Plowd
Plowden's Commentaries
Queen's Bench
Queen's Bench Division
Road Traffic Reports
Russ & Ry
Russell & Ryan's Crown Cases Reserved
Supreme Court Reports (Can.)
Times Law Reports
UKHL
United Kingdom House of Lords
UKPC
United Kingdom Privy Council
Victorian Law Reports (Aust.)
Weekly Law Reports
| xxix
I am very grateful to many colleagues who have offered intellectual and practical support
in the writing of this book. I am particularly grateful to several anonymous reviewers who
with great care provided comments on the first edition. I have also greatly benefited from
conversations with the following people who have (sometimes unknowingly) assisted in
the writing of the book: Andrew Ashworth, Alan Bogg, John Cartwright, Michelle Madden
Dempsey, Charles Foster, Stephen Gilmore, Sandra Fredman, and George P. Smith. The
many students to whom I have taught criminal law have greatly influenced this book by
their constant questioning of the accepted view on a topic and their insistence on no-nonsense answers. I also owe a great debt, as do countless other students, to Roy Stuart who as
my tutor introduced me to the study of criminal law. The team at Oxford University Press
has been excellent in their advice, assistance, and attention to detail. Many thanks are due
also to Joy Ruskin-Tompkins for her excellent copy-editing and Jennifer Green for her helpful comments. Above all I am grateful to my wife, Kirsten Johnson, and children, Laurel,
Joanna, and Darcy, for their encouragement, love, and laughter.
Grateful acknowledgement is made to all the authors and publishers of copyright material
which appears in this book, and in particular to the following for permission to reprint material from the sources indicated:
Extracts from Law Commission Reports (LCR); P Roberts: Consultation paper 177; and
Home Office reports are Crown copyright material and are reproduced under Class Licence
Number C2006010631 with the permission of the Controller of OPSI and the Queen's
Printer for Scotland. Extracts from House of Lords Reports (UKHL) are Parliamentary
copyright and are reproduced by permission of the Controller of HMSO on behalf of
Parliament.
Fred J. Abbate: extract from 'The conspiracy doctrine: A critique' in Philosophy and Public
Affairs, Vol. 11, Spring 1974.
Akron Law Review: extract from V. Munro: 'Constructing consent: Legislating freedom
and legitimating constraint in the expression of sexual autonomy', 41 Akron Law Review 923
(2008), copyright © 2008, Akron Law Review, The University of Akron, School of Law.
Peter Arenella: extracts from 'Convicting the morally blameless: Reassessing the relationship between legal and moral accountability', 39 UCLA Law Review 1151 (1992).
Arizona Law Review, College of Law, University of Arizona and the author: extracts from
Douglas N. Husak: 'The nature and justifiability of nonconsummate offenses', 37 Arizona
Law Review 151 (1995), copyright © 1995 by the Arizona Board of Regents and Douglas N.
Husak.
Ashgate Publishing: extracts from Joan MacGregor: Is it Rape? On Acquaintance Rape and
Taking Women's Consent Seriously (Ashgate, 2005); and Victor Tadros: 'The limits of manslaughter', in Chris Clarkson and Sally Cunningham (eds.): Criminal Liability for NoneAggressive Death (Ashgate, 2008).
Cambridge Law Journal and the authors: extracts from Cambridge Law Journal: John
Gardner: 'Rationality and the rule of law in offences against the person', CLJ 502 (1994); and
Glanville Williams: 'Oblique intention' CLJ 417 (1987).
Cambridge University Press and the authors: extracts from A. Norrie: Crime Reason and
History: A Critical Introduction to Criminal Law (CUP, 2001); and Michael S. Moore 'The
moral worth of retribution' in Ferdinand Schoeman (ed.): Responsibility, Character, and the
Emotions: New Essays in Moral Psychology (CUP, 1987).
Cobb, Neil: extract from 'Compulsory care-giving: Some thoughts on relational feminism,
the ethics of care and omissions liability', 39 Cambrian Law Review 11 (2008), copyright ©
Neil Cobb 2008.
Cornell Law Review: extract from Laurie L. Levenson: 'Good faith defenses: Reshaping
strict liability crimes', 78 Cornell Law Review 401 (1993).
xxxii |
Hart Publishing Ltd: extracts from A.P. Simester, J.R. Spencer, G.R. Sullivan and G.J.
Virgo: Simester and Sullivan's Criminal Law: Theory and Doctrine (4e, Hart, 2010);
and William Wilson: Central Issues in Criminal Theory (Hart, 2002); and extract from
J. Horder: 'Between provocation and diminished responsibility', Kings College Law Journal
143 (1999).
Incorporated Council of Law Reporting: extracts from the Law Reports: Appeal Cases
(AC), Queen's Bench Division (QB), and Family Court Reports (Fam).
News International Syndication: 'Widow gave poisoned sherry to man who rejected her',
The Times, 4.4.2003, copyright © The Times 2003.
New York University Law Review: extract from S. Buell: 'Novel criminal fraud', 81 New York
University Law Review 1971 (2006).
Northwestern University School of Law: extract from Sanford H. Kadish: 'Reckless complicity', 87:2 The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 369 (1997). Reprinted by special
Oxford University Press: extracts from Andrew Ashworth: Principles of Criminal Law (6e,
OUP, 2009); Antony Duff: Criminal Attempts (OUP, 1996); George Fletcher: Basic Concepts
of Criminal Law (OUP, 1998); H. L. A. Hart: Punishment and Responsibility: Essays in the
Philosophy of Law (OUP, 1968); J. Horder: Excusing Crime (OUP, 2004); F. Leverick: Killing
in Self-Defence (OUP, 2006); Michael Moore: Act and Crime (OUP, 1993); Michael Moore:
Placing Blame (OUP, 1997); V. Tadros: Criminal Responsibility (OUP, 2005); Celia Wells:
Corporations and Criminal Responsibility (2e, OUP, 2001); Lucia Zedner: Criminal Justice
(OUP, 2005); A. Simester and G. Sullivan: 'The nNature and rational of property offences',
and V. Tadros: 'The distinctiveness of domestic abuse', in R. A. Duff and S. P. Green (eds):
Defining Crimes: Essays on the Special Part of Criminal Law (OUP, 2005); Andrew Ashworth:
'Belief, intent and criminal liability', in J. Eekelaar and J. Bell: Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence
(OUP, 1987); John Gardner and Stephen Shute: 'The wrongness of rape', and Nicola Lacey:
'Philosophical foundations of the common law: Social not metaphysical', in J. Horder (ed.):
Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence (4th Series, OUP, 2000); Nicola Lacey: 'Legal constructions of
crime', in M. Maguire, R. Morgan and R. Reiner (eds): The Oxford Handbook of Criminology
(OUP, 2007); R. A. Duff: 'Rule-violations and wrongdoings', and V. Tadros: 'Recklessness and
the duty to take care', in S. Shute and A. Simester (eds): Criminal Law Theory (OUP, 2002);
A. Simester: 'Is strict liability always wrong?' in A. Simester (ed.): Strict Liability (OUP, 2005);
R. A. Duff: 'Subjectivism, objectivism, and criminal attempts', J. Gardner: 'Justifications and
reasons', Grant Lamond: 'Coercion, threats, and blackmail', and G. R. Sullivan: 'Making
excuses', in A. Simester and A. Smith (eds): Harm and Culpability (OUP, 1996); L. Alexander
and K. Kessler Ferza:, 'Beyond the special part' in S. Green and R. A. Duff (eds) Philosophical
Foundations of Criminal Law (OUP, 2011); L. Farmer: 'Defi nitions of crime' in P. Cane and
J. Conaghan (eds) The Oxford Companion to Law (OUP, 2008); and G. P. Fletcher: Rethinking
Criminal Law (OUP, 2000).
Oxford University Press Journals and the authors: extracts from Oxford Journal of Legal
Studies: C. Clarkson: 'Attempt: The conduct requirement', 29 OJLS 25 (2009); M. MaddenDempsey and J. Herring: 'Why sexual penetration requires justification', 27 OJLS 467
(2007); A. P. Simester: 'Mistakes in defence', 12 OJLS 295 (1992); G. R. Sullivan: 'Is criminal
| xxxiii
law possible?', OJLS 747 (2002); and Victor Tadros: 'The characters of excuses', 21 OJLS 495
(2001), and 'Rape without consent', 26 OJLS 515 (2007).
Pillsbury, Samuel H.: extract from 'Crimes against the heart: Recognizing the wrongs of
forced sex', 35 Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 845 (2002).
Reed Elsevier (UK) Ltd trading as LexisNexis: extracts from All England Law Reports (All
ER) and England & Wales Court of Appeal: Criminal Division (EWCA Crim).
Santa Clara Law Review: extract from Joshua Dressler: 'Some brief thoughts (mostly negative) about 'bad samaritan' laws', 40 Santa Clara Law Review 971 (2000).
Schneider, Elizabeth M.: extract from 'The violence of privacy' in Martha Albertson
Fineman and R. Mykitiuk (eds): The Public Nature of Private Violence (Routledge, 1994).
Springer Science & Business Media: extracts from A. Ashworth and L. Zedner: 'Defending
criminal law: Reflections on the changing character of crime, procedure, and sanctions',
2:21 Criminal Law & Philosophy (2008); J. Gardner: 'Complicity and causality', 1 Criminal
Law & Philosophy 127 (2007); and N. Lacey: 'Space, time and function: Intersecting principles of responsibility across the terrain of criminal justice', 1 Criminal Law & Philosophy
Sweet & Maxwell Ltd: extracts from Criminal Appeal Reports; extracts from Law
Quarterly Review: Andrew Ashworth: 'Is criminal law a lost cause?', 116 LQR 225 (2000),
and 'The scope of criminal liability for omissions', 105 LQR 431 (1989); Simon Gardner:
'Appropriation in theft: The last word?', 109 LQR 194; Tony Honoré: 'Responsibility and
luck', 104 LQR 530 (1988); B. Mitchell, R. Mackay, and W. Brookbanks: 'Pleading for provoked killers: In defence of Morgan Smith', 124 LQR 675 (2008); A. P. Simester: 'The mental
element in complicity', 123 LQR 578 (2006); and Rebecca Williams: 'Deception, mistake
and vitiation of the victim's consent', 124 LQR 132 (2008); and extracts from Criminal Law
Review: Andrew Ashworth: 'Robbery re-assessed', Crim LR 851 (2002) and 'Principles,
pragmatism and the Law Commission's recommendations on homicide law reform', Crim
LR 333 (2007); Andrew Ashworth and Jennifer Temkin: 'The Sexual Offences Act 2003:
(1) Rape, sexual acts and the problems of consent', Crim LR 328 (2004); I. Dennis: 'Reverse
onuses and the presumption of innocence: In search of principle', Crim LR 901 (2005);
Emily Finch: 'Stalking the perfect stalking law: An evaluation of the efficacy of the protection from Harassment Act 1997', Crim LR 703 (2002); S. Gardner: 'Direct action and the
defence of necessity', Crim LR 371 (2005); E. Griew: 'Dishonesty: The objections to feely
and ghosh', Crim LR 341 (1985); J. Herring: 'Mistaken sex', Crim LR 511 (2005); Jeremy
Horder: 'Reconsidering psychic assault', Crim LR 392 (1998) and 'Transferred malice and
the remoteness of unexpected outcomes from intentions', Crim LR 383 (2006); R. Mackay:
'The Coroners and Justice Act 2009—Partial defences to murder (2) The new diminished responsibility plea', Crim LR 290 (2010); A. Norrie: 'The Coroners and Justice Act
2009—Partial defences to murder (1) Loss of control', Crim LR 275 (2010); D. Ormerod:
'The Fraud Act 2006–criminalising lying?', Crim LR 193 (2007); D. Ormerod and R.
Fortson: 'Serious Crime Act 2007: The part 2 offences', Crim LR 389 (2009); S. Shute: 'The
Second Law Commission Consultation Paper on Consent (1) something old, something
borrowed: Th ree aspects of the project', Crim LR 684 (1996) and 'Appropriation and the
law of theft', Crim LR 445 (2002); K. J. M. Smith: 'Withdrawal in complicity: A restatement
xxxiv |
of principles', Crim LR 769 (2001); M. Weait: 'Knowledge, autonomy and consent: R v
Konzani', Crim LR 763 (2005); and Glanville Williams: 'Temporary appropriation should
be theft', Crim LR 129 (1981).
Taylor & Francis Books UK: extracts from Nicola Lacey: 'General principles of criminal law?
A feminist view' and Aileen McColgan: 'General defences' in D. Nicolson and L. Bibbings
(eds) Feminist Perspectives on Criminal Law (Cavendish Press, 1996).
University of California, Hastings College of the Law: extract from Stuart P Green: 'Lying,
misleading, and falsely denying: How moral concepts inform the law of perjury, fraud and
false statements', 53:1 Hastings Law Journal 157 (November 2001).
University of California Press: extracts from Buffalo Criminal Law Review: A. Duff: 'Harms
and wrongs', 5 BCLR 13 (2001); V. Nourse: 'Heart and minds: Understanding the new culpability', 6 BCLR 361 (2002); and A. P. Simester: 'On the so-called requirement for voluntary
action', 1 BCLR 403 (1998); and extract from New Criminal Law Review: D. Baker: 'The
moral limits of consent in criminal law', 12 New CLR 93 (2008).
University of Chicago Press: extracts from C.A. MacKinnon: 'Feminism, Marxism, method
and the state: Toward feminist jurisprudence', 8:4 Signs 635 (1983).
University of Michigan Law School: extracts from M. A. Gomez: 'The writing on our walls:
Finding solutions through distinguishing graffiti art from graffiti vandalism', 26 University
of Michigan Law Journal of Law Reform 633 (1993).
University of Pennsylvania Law School: extracts from Neal Kumar Katyal: 'Criminal law in
cyberspace', 149 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 1003 (2001).
University of Southern California Law School: extract from Grace E. Mueller: 'The mens
rea of accomplice liability', 61 Southern California Law Review, pp. 2169–2173 (1988).
University of Western Ontario: extracts from The Canadian Journal of Law & Jurisprudence:
Dennis Klimchuck: 'Causation, thin skulls and equality', 11 CJLJ 115 (1998); and Nicola
Lacey: 'Unspeakable subjects, impossible rights: Sexuality, integrity and criminal law', 11
CJLJ 47 (1998).
Vathek Publishing: extract from C. Withey: 'The Fraud Act 2006—Some early observations and comparisons with the former law', 30 Journal of Criminal Law 220 (2007); and
J. Stannard: 'Sticks, stones and words: Emotional harm and the English criminal law', 74
Journal of Criminal Law 533 (2010).
Wiley-Blackwell Publishing: extracts from Modern Law Review: J. Gobert: 'The Corporate
Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007—Thirteen years in the making but was
it worth the wait?', 71 MLR 413; Nicola Lacey: 'A clear concept of intention: Elusive or illusory?', 56 MLR 621 (1993); and Barry Mitchell: 'Multiple wrongdoing and offence structure:
A plea for consistency and fair labelling', 64 MLR 394 (2001). Extract from R. Duff: 'Towards
a theory of criminal law?' in Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume
lxxxiv (Wiley-Blackwell, 2010) Reprinted by courtesy of the Editor of the Aristotelian
Society: © 2010.
| xxxv
Yale Law Journal Company: extract from Victoria Nourse: 'Passions' progress: Modern law
reform and the provocation defense', 106 Yale Law Journal 1331(1997).
Every effort has been made to trace and contact copyright holders prior to publication but
this has not been possible in every case. If notified, the publisher will undertake to rectify
any errors or omissions at the earliest opportunity.
Where extracts from cases are reproduced, the relevant page numbers are shown in bold.
A (A Juvenile) v R [1978] Crim LR 689 . . . 622
A (A Minor), Re [1992] 3 Med LR 303 . . . 239
A (Children) (Conjoined Twins: Medical
Treatment) (No.1), Re; sub nom A (Children)
(Conjoined Twins: Surgical Separation), Re
[2001] Fam 147; [2001] 2 WLR 480; [2000] 4 All
ER 961 (CA) . . . 17, 656, 657, 658–62, 756, 766
A (FC) v Secretary of State for the Home
Department [2004] UKHL 56 . . . 757
A v United Kingdom [1998] 2 FLR 959; [1998]
3 FCR 597; (1999) 27 EHRR 611 (ECtHR) . . .
Abbott v R [1977] AC 755; [1976] 3 WLR 462;
[1976] 3 All ER 140; (1976) 63 Cr App R 241
(PC) (Trin) . . . 667
Adams v Camfoni [1929] 1 KB 95 (KBD) . . . 773
Adams v The Queen [1995] 1 WLR 52 (PC) . . . 824
ADT v United Kingdom [2000] Crim LR
1009 . . . 464
Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993] AC 789; [1993]
2 WLR 316; [1993] 1 All ER 821; [1993] Crim LR
877 (HL) . . . 81–5, 113, 265
Albert v Lavin [1982] AC 546; [1981] 3 WLR
955; [1981] 3 All ER 878; (1982) 74 Cr App R
150 . . . 749
Allen v Whitehead [1930] 1 KB 211 . . . 773
Alphacell Ltd v Woodward [1972] AC 824
(HL) . . . 222, 229
Anderton v Ryan [1985] AC 560 (HL) . . . 802, 803
Andrews v DPP; sub nom R v Andrews [1937] AC
576 (HL) . . . 270, 273
Andronicou and Constantinou v Cyprus
(25052/94) (1998) 25 EHRR 491; 3 BHRC 389;
[1998] Crim LR 823 (ECtHR) . . . 654
Armhouse Lee Ltd v Chappell (1996) The Times,
7 August; (1996) The Independent, 26 July
(CA) . . . 827
Arrowsmith v Jenkins [1963] 2 QB 561; [1963] 2
WLR 856; [1963] 2 All ER 210 . . . 180
Ashley v Chief Constable of Sussex [2008] UKHL
25 . . . 31, 651
Attorney-General for Jersey v Holley [2005]
UKPC 23; [2005] 3 WLR 29; [2005] 3 All ER
371; [2005] 2 Cr App R 36 . . . 305
Attorney-General of Northern Ireland v Gallagher
(Patrick) [1963] AC 349 (HL) . . . 163, 523
Attorney-General of Northern Ireland's
Reference (No.1 of 1975), Re [1977] AC 105
Attorney-General of South Australia v Brown
[1960] AC 432 . . . 704
Attorney-General v Able [1984] QB 795
(CA) . . . 857, 858, 875
Attorney-General's Reference (No.1 of 1974), Re
[1974] QB 744; [1974] 2 WLR 891; [1974] 2 All
ER 899; (1974) 59 Cr App R 203 (CA) . . . 540
[1975] QB 773; [1975] 3 WLR 11; [1975] 2 All
ER 684; (1975) 61 Cr App Rep 118 (CA) . . . 857,
Attorney-General's Reference (Nos.1 and 2 of
1979), Re [1980] QB 180; [1979] 3 WLR 577;
[1979] 3 All ER 143 (CA) . . . 605, 794
[1981] 1 WLR 705 (CA) . . . 170
[1981] QB 715; [1981] 1 WLR 705 (CA) . . . 369,
[1985] QB 182 (CA) . . . 516
[1993] QB 94 (CA) . . . 631, 632
Attorney-General's Reference (No.1 of 1992),
Re [1993] 1 WLR 274; [1993] 2 All ER 190
(CA) . . . 789, 798
[1994] QB 91; [1993] 3 WLR 982; [1993] 4 All
ER 683; (1993) 97 Cr App R 429 (CA) . . . 685,
Re [1994] 1 WLR 409; (1994) 98 Cr App R
383; [1994] RTR 122; [1994] Crim LR 348
(CA) . . . 630, 791–2, 793, 794
Re [1998] AC 245; [1997] 3 WLR 421; [1997]
3 All ER 936; [1998] 1 Cr App R 91; [1997]
Crim LR 829 (HL) . . . 165, 167, 241, 267–9,
271–2, 288
ER 182; [2001] BCC 210; [2000] 2 BCLC 257;
[2000] 2 Cr App R 207; [2000] IRLR 417; [2000]
Crim LR 475 (CA) . . . 278
[2005] 1 AC 264 (HL) . . . 48–51
2002), Re [2002] EWCA Crim 127; [2002] 2 Cr
App R (S) 77; [2002] Crim LR 333 (CA) . . . 62
[2004] 2 Cr App R 367 . . . 151
[2005] EWCA Crim 1415; [2006] 1 All ER 988;
[2006] Crim LR 148 . . . 682
[2005] EWCA Crim 1882 . . . 876
[2005] Crim LR 799 (CA) . . . 351
Attorney-General's Reference (No.79 of 2006), Re
[2007] 1 Cr App R (S) 752 . . . 446
Atwal v Massey [1971] 3 All ER 881 . . . 543
Ayliffe v DPP [2005] 3 All ER 330 . . . 650
B (A Child) v DPP [2000] UKHL 13; [2000] 2
AC 428; [2000] 2 WLR 452; [2000] 1 All ER
833; [2000] Crim LR 403 (HL) . . . 172, 216–19,
B (a Minor) v DPP [1998] 4 All ER 265; [1999] 3
WLR 116 . . . 219
B (Consent to Treatment: Capacity), Re; sub nom
B v NHS Hospital Trust; B (Adult: Refusal of
Medical Treatment), Re [2002] EWHC 429;
[2002] 2 All ER 449 . . . 265
B and R v DPP [2007] EWHC 739
(Admin) . . . 538
B and S v Leathley [1979] Crim LR 314 . . . 598
Bank of New South Wales v Piper [1897] AC 383
(PC) (Aus) . . . 217
Barber v Superior Court of State of California 195
Cal Rptr 484 . . . 85
Barnfather v Islington LBC [2003] EWHC 418
(Admin); [2003] All ER (D) 89; [2003] ELR 263;
[2003] ACD 57 (QBD) . . . 215, 221, 222, 223
Baron v Crown Prosecution Service (QBD, 13
June 2000) . . . 354, 412
Beatty v Gillbanks (1881–82) 9 QBD 308
(QBD) . . . 862
Beckford v R [1988] AC 130 (PC) . . . 239, 645, 649,
651, 706, 707, 747–50
Bedder v DPP [1954] 1 WLR 1119 (HL) . . . 320
Bell v Lever Brothers Ltd [1932] AC 161 . . . 521
Bellinger v Bellinger [2003] UKHL 21 . . . 40
Bently (1850) 4 Cox 406 . . . 345
Blake v Barnard (1840) 9 C & P 626; 173 ER
Blake v DPP [1993] Crim LR 586 (DC) . . . 625, 644
Blakely v DPP; Sutton v DPP [1991] RTR 405;
[1991] Crim LR 763 (DC) . . . 875
Boggeln v Williams [1978] 1 WLR 873 . . . 535
Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee
[1957] 1 WLR 582 . . . 82
| xxxvii
Bratty v Attorney-General of Northern Ireland
[1963] AC 386 (HL) . . . 72, 687, 692, 693, 694,
Brock and Wyner [2001] 1 WLR 1159; [2001] 2 Cr
App R 31 . . . 118
Broom v Crowther (1984) 148 JP 592 (DC) . . . 525
Broome v Perkins (1987) 85 Cr App R 321; [1987]
RTR 321 . . . 687, 688, 689
Brutus v Cozens [1973] AC 854 (HL) . . . 174
Burrell v Harmer [1967] Crim LR 169 . . . 378
Bush v Commonwealth 78 Ky 268 (1880)
(Kentucky Court of Appeals) . . . 97
C (A Minor) v Eisenhower see JCC (A Minor) v
Callow v Tillstone (1900) 83 LT 411; (1900) 64 JP
823 . . . 214, 875, 906
Caurti v DPP [2001] EWHC Admin 867; [2002]
Crim LR 131 (DC) . . . 356
Chamberlain v Lindon [1998] 1 WLR 1252 . . . 625
Chan Wing-Siu v The Queen [1985] AC
168 . . . 871, 873–4, 880
Chapman v DPP (1989) 89 Cr App R 190
Chief Constable of Avon and Somerset v
Shimmen (1987) 84 Cr App R 7 . . . 187–8
Chorherr v Austria (13308/87) [1993] ECtHR
36 . . . 45
Churchill (Victor George) (Senior) v Walton
[1967] 2 AC 224 (HL) . . . 816
Cichon v DPP [1994] Crim LR 918 . . . 656, 663
Cole v Turner (1704) 6 Mod Rep 149; 90 ER
Collins v Wilcock [1984] 1 WLR 1172; [1984] 3 All
ER 374; (1984) 79 Cr App R 229 . . . 331, 333–4,
Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis v
Streeter (1980) 71 Cr App R 113 . . . 540
Coppen v Moore (No.2) [1898] 2 QB 306
Corcoran v Anderton (1980) 71 Cr App R
Cordas v Peerless Transportation Co (1941) 27
NYS 2d 198 . . . 748
Cote v R [1986] 1 SCR 2 (Canada) . . . 826
Coward v Baddeley [1859] 4 H & N 478; 157 ER
Cox v Riley (1986) 83 Cr App R 54 (DC) . . . 622
CPS v Shabbir [2009] EWHC 2754
CR v United Kingdom [1996] 1 FLR 434
(ECtHR) . . . 79, 422
Cresswell v DPP [2006] EWHC 3379
Cundy v Le Cocq (1884) 13 QBD 207 . . . 221
Cunliffe v Goodman [1950] 2 KB 237 (CA) . . . 135
xxxviii |
Customs and Excise Commissioners v City of
London Magistrates' Court [2000] 1 WLR
D CC v LS [2010] EWHC 1544 (Fam) . . . 436
Davey v Lee [1968] 1 QB 366 . . . 835
Director General of Fair Trading v Pioneer
Concrete (UK) Ltd sub nom Supply of Ready
Mixed Concrete (No. 2) [1995] 1 AC 456 . . . 783
Director of Public Prosecutions see DPP
DPP for Northern Ireland v Lynch see Lynch v
DPP v A [2001] Crim LR 140 (DC) . . . 340
DPP v Andrews see Andrews v DPP; sub nom R v
Andrews [1937] AC 576 (HL)
DPP v B [2000] 2 WLR 452 (HL) . . . 706
DPP v Barker [2006] Crim LR 140 . . . 47
DPP v Bayer [2004] Crim LR 663 . . . 644
DPP v Bell [1992] RTR 335 . . . 669
DPP v Braun (Klaus Armstrong); sub nom DPP
v Armstrong-Braun (1999) 163 JP 271; [1999]
Crim LR 416 . . . 649
DPP v Camplin see R v Camplin (Paul); sub nom
DPP v Camplin [1978] AC 705 (HL)
DPP v Collins [2005] Crim LR 794 . . . 329
DPP v Gohill [2007] EWHC 239 (Admin) . . . 567
DPP v Gomez (Edwin) [1993] AC 442; [1992] 3
WLR 1067; [1993] 1 All ER 1; (1993) 96 Cr App
R 359; (1993) 157 JP 1; [1993] Crim LR 304
(HL) . . . 517–19, 520–3, 553–4, 556, 574
DPP v H (1997) see DPP v H [1997]; DPP v Harper
DPP v Harper; DPP v H [1997] 1 WLR 1406;
(1997) 161 JP 697; [1998] RTR 200; (1998) 39
BMLR 91; (1997) 94(18) LSG 31; [1998] RTR
200; (1997) The Times, 2 May . . . 226, 696
DPP v Hicks [2002] EWHC 1638; [2002] All ER
(D) 285 (QBD) . . . 669
DPP v K [1990] 1 WLR 1067; [1990] 1 All ER 331
(DC) . . . 333, 389
DPP v K and B; sub nom DPP v K and C [1997] 1
Cr App R 36 . . . 855, 887
DPP v Lavender (Melvyn) [1994] Crim LR
DPP v Lennon [2006] EWHC 1201
DPP v Little see DPP v Little; DPP v Taylor
DPP v McFarlane [2002] EWHC 485
DPP v Majewski; R v Majewski (Robert Stefan)
[1977] AC 443; [1976] 2 WLR 623; [1976] 2 All
ER 142 (HL) . . . 143, 149, 157, 159–61, 198–9,
DPP v Morgan (William Anthony); sub nom R
v Morgan (William Anthony) [1976] AC 182
(HL) . . . 160, 217, 447, 449, 450, 496, 497, 705,
DPP v Mullally [2006] EWHC 3448
DPP v Nedrick-Smith [2006] EWHC 3015
(Admin) . . . 852, 862
DPP v Newbury (Neil) [1977] AC 500 . . . 268
DPP v Nock [1978] AC 979; [1978] 3 WLR 57;
[1978] 2 All ER 654 (HL) . . . 814, 828
DPP v Pal [2000] Crim LR 756 (DC) . . . 352
DPP v R and B [1997] 1 Cr App R 36 (CA) . . . 422
DPP v Ramsdale [2001] EWHC Admin
106 . . . 354, 412
DPP v Ray [1974] AC 370; [1973] 3 WLR 359;
DPP v Santa-Bermudez [2003] EWHC 2908;
DPP v SJ, PI, RC [2002] EWHC 291
DPP v Smith (Jim) [1961] AC 290 (HL) . . . 135,
DPP v Smith (Michael Ross) [2006] EWHC
94 . . . 336
DPP v Taylor (Keith Richard); DPP v Little [1992]
QB 645; [1992] 1 All ER 299 . . . 326, 335
DPP v Woods [2002] EWHC 85
Drake v DPP (1994) 158 JP 828; [1994] RTR 411
(DC) . . . 623
Du Cros v Lambourne [1907] 1 KB 40 . . . 76, 864
Eldredge v US (1932) 62 F 2d 449 (US) . . . 891
Elliott v C (A Minor) [1983] 1 WLR 939; [1983]
2 All ER 1005; (1983) 77 Cr App R 103
(DC) . . . 147, 148, 150–2, 154, 173, 186
Ellis v DPP (No.1) [2001] EWHC 362
Empress Car Co (Abertillery) Ltd v National
Rivers Authority [1998] see Environment
Agency (formerly National Rivers Authority) v
Empress Car Co (Abertillery) Ltd
Environment Agency (formerly National Rivers
Authority) v Empress Car Co (Abertillery) Ltd
[1999] 2 AC 22; [1998] 2 WLR 350; [1998] 1 All
ER 481 (HL) . . . 87, 91
F v West Berkshire HA; sub nom F (Mental
Patient: Sterilisation), Re [1990] 2 AC 1; [1989] 2
WLR 1025; [1989] 2 All ER 545 (HL) . . . 81, 84,
Fagan v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
[1969] 1 QB 439; [1968] 3 All ER 442
(QBD) . . . 76, 78, 168–9, 226, 327, 331, 332
Faulkner v Talbot [1981] 1 WLR 1528; [1981] 3 All
ER 468 (CA) . . . 335
Ferens v O'Brien (1883) 11 QBD 21 . . . 511
Ferguson v Weaving [1951] 1 KB 814 (DC) . . . 773
Gammon (Hong Kong) Ltd v Attorney-General of
Hong Kong [1985] AC 1 (HL) . . . 221
Gardner v Akeroyd [1952] 2 QB 743 (DC) . . . 773
Garrett v Arthur Churchill (Glass) Ltd [1970] 1
QB 92 (CA) . . . 885
Gayford v Chouler [1898] 1 QB 316 (DC) . . . 622
Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech AHA [1986]
AC 112; [1985] 3 WLR 830; [1985] 3 All ER 402
(HL) . . . 202, 378, 435, 663, 867
Greater London Metropolitan Police
Commissioner v Streeter see Commissioner of
Police for the Metropolis v Streeter
Green v Burnett [1955] 1 QB 78 . . . 772
H v Crown Prosecution Service [2010] EWHC
1374 (Admin) . . . 377
Hardman v Chief Constable of Avon and
Somerset [1986] Crim LR 330 . . . 623
Harrow LBC v Shah [2000] 1 WLR 83; [1999] 3 All
ER 302; [1999] 2 Cr App R 457; (1999) 163 JP
525; [2000] Crim LR 692 (DC) . . . 214
Hashman and Harrup v United Kingdom
(25594/94) (2000) 30 EHRR 241; (2000)
8 BHRC 104; [2000] Crim LR 185
(ECtHR) . . . 44–6
Haughton v Smith [1975] AC 476 (HL) . . . 540,
Haystead v Chief Constable of Derbyshire; sub
nom Haystead v DPP [2000] 3 All ER 890;
[2000] 2 Cr App R 339; (2000) 164 JP 396;
Herald of Free Enterprise cases . . . 663, 765, 775,
Hibbert v McKiernan [1948] 2 KB 142 . . . 512
Hicks v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire [1992]
2 All ER 65 . . . 409
Hill v Baxter [1958] 1 QB 277; [1958] 2 WLR 76;
[1958] 1 All ER 193 . . . 685, 687
Hillen v ICI (Alkali) Ltd; Pettigrew v ICI (Alkali)
Ltd [1936] AC 65 (HL) . . . 603
Hobson v Impett (1957) 41 Cr App R 138 . . . 541
Holmes v DPP [1946] AC 588 (HL) . . . 319–20
Hui Chi-Ming v The Queen [1992] 1 AC 34;
[1991] 3 WLR 495; [1991] 3 All ER 897 (PC)
(HK) . . . 887
Hyam v DPP [1975] AC 55; [1974] 2 All ER 41
(HL) . . . 135, 136, 180, 182, 284, 825
Idrees v DPP [2011] EWHC 624 (Admin) . . . 571
Jaggard v Dickenson [1981] QB 527; [1981] 2 WLR
118; [1980] 3 All ER 716 (DC) . . . 625, 708
JCC (A Minor) v Eisenhower; sub nom C (A
Minor) v Eisenhower [1984] QB 331; (1984) 78
Cr App R 48 (DC) . . . 338
Johnson v DPP [2008] EWHC 509
| xxxix
Johnson v Phillips [1976] 1 WLR 65; [1975] 3 All
ER 682 . . . 658
Johnson v Youden [1950] 1 KB 544; [1950] 1 All
ER 300 (DC) . . . 867, 877
Jones v DPP [2010] EWHC 523 (Admin) . . . 351
KA and AD v Belgium (Application Nos.
42758/98 and 45558/99) 17 February
Kane v HM Advocate [2009] HCJAC 8 . . . 92
Kay v Butterworth (1945) 61 TLR 452; (1945) 173
LT 191 . . . 72, 167
Kelly v DPP [2003] Crim LR 43 (DC) . . . 353
King v DPP (QBD, 20 June 2000) . . . 354
Knuller (Publishing, Printing and Promotions)
Ltd v DPP [1973] AC 435 (HL) . . . 827
Kumar, Re [2000] Crim LR 504 . . . 515
Laskey, Jaggard and Brown v United Kingdom
(1997) 24 EHRR 39 . . . 359, 372, 397
Lau v DPP [2000] 1 FLR 799; [2000] Crim LR 586
Lawrence v Commissioner of Police for the
Metropolis see R v Lawrence [1972] AC
Lee Chun-Chuen v R [1963] AC 220 (PC)
Lewin v CPS [2002] EWHC 1049 (Admin) . . . 75
Lim Chin Aik v R [1963] AC 160 (PC) . . . 222, 708
Lloyd v DPP [1992] 1 All ER 982 . . . 623
Logdon v DPP [1976] Crim LR 121 . . . 330
Low v Blease [1975] Crim LR 513 . . . 510
Luc Th iet Thuan v The Queen [1997] AC
Lynch v DPP [1975] AC 653 (HL) . . . 201, 667, 676,
McAuliffe v The Queen 69 ALJR 621 . . . 871
McCann v United Kingdom (A/324) (1996) 21
EHRR 97 . . . 654
McCrone v Riding [1938] 1 All ER 721 . . . 154
Macklin and Murphy's Case (1838) 2 Lew CC
McLoughlin v O'Brian [1983] AC 410 . . . 679
McNaghten's Case see R v McNaghten
Majewski see DPP v Majewski; R v Majewski
(Robert Stefan)
Martin v City of Indianapolis 192 F 3d 608 (7th
Cir, 1999) . . . 635
Masterson v Holden [1986] 1 WLR 1017 . . . 10
Matthews v Ministry of Defence [2003] UKHL 4;
[2003] 1 AC 1163 . . . 224
Maxwell v DPP (1979) 68 Cr App R 128
Meli v The Queen [1954] 1 WLR 228 . . . 167
Melias v Preston [1957] 2 QB 380 (CA) . . . 772
xl |
Moberley v Allen (1991) The Times, 13
December . . . 585
Mohan (Ramnath) v The Queen [1967] 2 AC 187
Moore v DPP [2010] EWHC 1822 (Admin) . . . 797
Morphitis v Salmon (1990) 154 JP 365; [1990]
Crim LR 48 (DC) . . . 623
Mousell Brothers Ltd v London and North
Western Railway Co [1917] 2 KB 836,
KBD . . . 772
Nancy B v Hotel-Dieu de Quebec (1992) 86 DLR
(4th) 385 . . . 83
National Coal Board v Gamble [1959] 1 QB 11;
(1958) 42 Cr App R 240 . . . 858, 866, 867, 885,
NHS Trust A v M; NHS Trust B v H [2001] Fam
348; [2001] 2 WLR 942; [2001] 1 All ER 801;
[2001] 2 FLR 367 . . . 265
Norfolk Constabulary v Seekings and Gould
Norris v Government of the United States of
America [2008] UKHL 16 . . . 44, 824
Oxford v Moss (1979) 68 Cr App R 183
Palmer (Sigismund) v The Queen [1971] AC 814
(PC) . . . 650
Parker v British Airways Board [1982] QB
1004; [1982] 2 WLR 503; [1982] 1 All ER 834
Parker v R [1964] AC 1369 . . . 252
Parry v DPP [2004] EWHC 3112 (Admin) . . . 351
People v Beardsley (1967) 113 NW 1128 . . . 74
Percy v DPP [2001] EWHC Admin 1125 . . . 45
Perka v R (1984) 13 DLR (4th) 1 . . . 661
Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v
Storkwain Ltd [1986] 1 WLR 903 (HL) . . . 221
Phillips v United Kingdom [2001] Crim LR 217
(ECtHR) . . . 47
Pinkerton v US (1946) 328 US 640 . . . 894
Postermobile plc v Brent LBC [1997] EWHC 1002
Practice Statement (Judicial Precedent) [1966] 1
WLR 1234 . . . 149, 803
Pretty see also R (Pretty) v DPP
Pretty v United Kingdom (2346/02) [2002] 2 FLR
45; [2002] 2 FCR 97 . . . 265
Quality Dairies (York) Ltd v Pedley [1952] 1 KB
275 (DC) . . . 773
R (Brenda Rowley) v DPP [2003] EWHC 693
R (DPP) v Dykes [2008] EWHC 2775
R (E) v DPP [2011] EWHC 1465 (Admin) . . . 455
R (Howitt) v Preston Magistrates' Court [2009]
EWHC 1284 (Admin) . . . 53
R (Jenkins) v HM Coroner for Portsmouth and
South East Hampshire and Cameron and Finn
[2009] EWHC 3229 (Admin) . . . 80
R (Pretty) v DPP [2001] UKHL 61; [2002] 1 AC
800; [2001] 3 WLR 1598; [2002] 1 All ER 1;
[2002] 2 Cr App R 1; [2002] 1 FLR 268; [2002] 1
FCR 1 (HL) . . . 265
R (Purdy) v DPP [2009] UKHL 45 . . . 37, 265
R (Ricketts) v Basildon Magistrates' Court [2010]
EWHC 2358 (Admin) . . . 512
R (Smeaton) v Secretary of State for Health [2002]
EWHC 610; [2002] 2 FLR 146; [2002] 2 FCR
193; [2002] Crim LR 664 . . . 239
R (Stephens) v DPP (QBD 19 October
2000) . . . 298
R v A, 12 May 2003 (CA) . . . 669
R v A, B, C and D [2010] EWCA Crim
1622 . . . 883–4
R v Abdul-Hussain; Aboud; Hasan; Naji;
Muhssin; Hosham [1999] Crim LR 570
(CA) . . . 662, 670, 672, 680
R v Abdullahi [2006] EWCA Crim 2060; [2007]
Crim LR 184; [2007] 1 Cr App R 14 . . . 454, 457
R v Acott (Brian Gordon) [1997] 1 WLR 306;
[1997] 1 All ER 706; [1997] 2 Cr App R 94
(HL) . . . 245
R v Adams [1957] see R v Bodkin Adams [1957]
Crim LR 365
R v Adams [1995] 1 WLR 52 (PC) . . . 824
R v Adomako (John Asare) [1995] 1 AC 171;
[1994] 3 WLR 288; [1994] 3 All ER 79; [1994]
Crim LR 757 (HL) . . . 154, 272, 273–4, 276, 277,
R v Ahluwalia [1992] 4 All ER 889; (1993) 96 Cr
App R 133; [1993] Crim LR 63 (CA) . . . 251–3,
R v Ahmad (Zafar) (1987) 84 Cr App R 64; (1986)
18 HLR 416; (1986) 52 P & CR 346 (CA) . . . 73
R v Ahmed [2010] EWCA 1949 . . . 239
R v Aitken (Thomas Adam) [1992] 1 WLR
1006; [1992] 4 All ER 541; (1992) 95 Cr App R
R v Ali [2001] 2 WLR 211 (CA) . . . 255
R v Ali [2005] Crim LR 864 . . . 816
R v Allan (George Donald) [1965] 1 QB 130
R v Allen (Christopher) [1985] AC 1029; [1985] 3
WLR 107; [1985] 2 All ER 641; (1985) 81 Cr App
R 200; (1985) 149 JP 587; [1985] Crim LR 739
R v Allen (Kevin) [1988] Crim LR 698 (CA) . . . 156
R v Allen (Tony John) [2005] EWCA Crim
R v Allsop (1977) 64 Cr App R 29 (CA) . . . 825,
R v Altham [2006] Crim LR 633 . . . 673
R v Anderson (Lascelles Fitzalbert); R v Morris
(Emmanuel) [1966] 2 QB 110; [1966] 2 WLR
1195 . . . 871, 873, 874
R v Anderson (William Ronald) [1986] AC
27; [1985] 3 WLR 268; [1985] 2 All ER 961;
(1985) 81 Cr App R 253; [1985] Crim LR 651
(HL) . . . 818–21, 850
R v Andrews see Andrews v DPP; sub nom R v
R v Andrews (Christopher Kenneth) [2002] EWCA
Crim 3021; [2003] Crim LR 477 . . . 270, 379
R v Antar [2004] EWCA Crim 2708 . . . 671
R v Antoine (Pierre Harrison) [2001] 1 AC
340; [2000] 2 WLR 703; [2000] 2 All ER 208
(HL) . . . 254, 698, 700
R v Ardalan (Siamak) [1972] 1 WLR 463; [1972] 2
All ER 257 (CA) . . . 814
R v Ashford and Smith (CA, 26 May 1988) . . . 626,
R v Ashton [1992] Crim LR 667 (CA) . . . 821
R v Atakpu (Austin) and Abrahams [1994] QB 69
R v Atkinson (1869) 11 Cox CC 330 . . . 864
R v Austin (Christopher Timothy) [1981] 1 All ER
374 (CA) . . . 887
R v Ayres (David Edward) [1984] AC 447
R v Azam [2010] EWCA Crim 226 . . . 876
R v Aziz [1993] Crim LR 708 (CA) . . . 586, 587
R v Backshall (David Anthony) [1998] 1 WLR
1506; [1999] 1 Cr App R 35; [1998] RTR 423;
[1999] Crim LR 662 (CA) . . . 226, 644
R v Badza [2009] EWCA Crim 2695 . . . 877
R v Bailey (1800) Russ & Ry 1 . . . 708
R v Bainbridge (Alan) [1960] 1 QB 129; (1959) Cr
App R 194 (CA) . . . 857, 867, 875
R v Baker [1994] Crim LR 444 (CA) . . . 889
R v Baker [1999] 2 Cr App R 335 (CA) . . . 677
R v Baker (Janet); R v Wilkins (Carl) [1997] Crim
LR 497 (CA) . . . 625, 651, 670
R v Ball [1989] Crim LR 730 (CA) . . . 271
R v Balogun [1999] EWCA Crim 2120 . . . 652
R v Barnard (1837) 7 C & P 784; 173 ER 342 . . . 572
R v Barnard (Philip Charles) (1980) 70 Cr App R
28 (CA) . . . 816
R v Barnes [2005] 1 WLR 910 . . . 362, 375
R v Bassett (Kevin) [2008] EWCA Crim
R v Bastian (Stephen) [1958] 1 WLR 413 . . . 690
R v Bateman (Percy) (1925) 19 Cr App R 8
(CCA) . . . 273, 275
R v Bates [1999] 1 Cr App R 126 (CA) . . . 877
R v Becerra (Antonio) (1975) 62 Cr App R 212
R v Becker (Ferdinand) (CA, 19 June 2000) . . . 278
| xli
R v Beech (Hugh Sadler) (1912) 7 Cr App R 197
(CA) . . . 98
R v Belfon (Horace Adrian) [1976] 1 WLR 741;
[1976] 3 All ER 46; (1976) 63 Cr App R 59
R v Benge (1865) 4 F & F 504 . . . 88
R v Bennett (Christine) [1995] Crim LR 877
R v Bevans (Ronald George Henry) (1988) 87 Cr
App R 64 (CA) . . . 607
R v Bird (Debbie) [1985] 1 WLR 816 (CA) . . . 649,
R v Bland (1987) 151 JP 857; [1988] Crim LR 41
R v Blaue (Robert Konrad) [1975] 1 WLR 1411;
(CA) . . . 97, 99–101, 102, 127
R v Bloxham (Albert John) [1983] 1 AC 109; [1982]
2 WLR 392; [1982] 1 All ER 582; (1982) 74 Cr
App R 279 (HL) . . . 542–3
R v Bodkin Adams [1957] Crim LR 365 . . . 202,
R v Bollom [2003] EWCA Crim 2846 . . . 240, 339
R v Bonner (George Andrew) [1970] 1 WLR 838;
[1970] 2 All ER 97 (CA) . . . 513
R v Bonnyman (1942) 28 Cr App R 131 (CA) . . . 74
R v Booth (Stephen) (Arson or Criminal Damage)
R v Bosson [1999] Crim LR 596 (CA) . . . 542
R v Bourne [1938] 3 All ER 615 . . . 663
R v Bourne (Sydney Joseph) (1952) 36 Cr App R
125 (CCA) . . . 887, 896
R v Bournewood Community and Mental Health
NHS Trust, ex p L [1999] 1 AC 458; [1998] 3
WLR 107; [1998] 3 All ER 289 (HL) . . . 662
R v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary
Magistrate, ex p United States (No.2) [2000] 2
AC 216 (HL) . . . 633
R v Bowden [1993] Crim LR 379 (CA) . . . 162
R v Bowden (Stephen Robert) [2002] EWCA Crim
1279 (CA) . . . 526
R v Bowen (Cecil) [1997] 1 WLR 372; [1996] 4 All
ER 837; [1996] 2 Cr App R 157 (CA) . . . 671, 672,
R v Boyea (1992) 156 JP 505; [1992] Crim LR 574
R v Bradley (John William) (1980) 2 Cr App R (S)
R v Brady [2007] EWCA Crim 2413 . . . 151
R v Brain (1834) 6 C & P 349 . . . 239
R v Bree [2007] EWCA Crim 804 . . . 436–9, 440
R v Brennan [1990] Crim LR 118 . . . 536
R v Brewster (Alex Edward) [1998] 1 Cr App R 220
R v Briggs [2004] Crim LR 495 . . . 517
R v Briggs (Basil Ian) [1977] 1 WLR 605; [1977] 1
All ER 475; (1976) 63 Cr App R 215 . . . 145, 146
xlii |
R v Bristol Magistrates' Court, ex p E [1999] 1
WLR 390; [1998] 3 All ER 798 (QBD) . . . 799
R v Broad (Christopher) [1997] Crim LR 666
R v Brooks (Edward George); R v Brooks (Julie
Ann) (1982) 76 Cr App R 66 (CA) . . . 585, 587
R v Brown (1841) Car & M 314 . . . 864
R v Brown (Anthony Joseph); R v Laskey (Colin);
R v Jaggard (Roland Leonard); R v Lucas
(Saxon); R v Carter (Christopher Robert); R v
Cadman (Graham William) [1994] 1 AC 212;
[1993] 2 WLR 556; [1993] 2 All ER 75; (1993)
1 Cr App R 44 (HL) . . . 335, 359, 361, 363, 365,
366–72, 373–7, 378, 380, 395, 397–401, 405
R v Brown (Michael Thomas Ernest) [1970] 1 QB
R v Brown (Peter) [2003] EWCA Crim
R v Brown and Stratton [1998] Crim LR 484
R v Brown (Vincent) [1985] Crim LR 212
R v Bryce [2004] EWCA Crim 1231; [2004] 2 Cr
App R 35 (CA) . . . 858, 859, 865–8
R v Bullock (1954) 38 Cr App R 151 . . . 867
R v Burgess (Barry Douglas) [1991] 2 QB 92
(CA) . . . 687, 687–9, 741
R v Burke [1986] QB 626 (CA); [1987] AC 417
(HL). . . . 888, 895
R v Burns 1995 SLT 1090 . . . 652
R v Burns [2010] EWCA Crim 1023 . . . 648
R v Burns (James) (1984) 79 Cr App R 173
R v Burstow see R v Ireland (Robert Matthew)
R v Buzalek; R v Schiffer [1991] Crim LR 130
R v Byrne (Patrick Joseph) [1960] 2 QB 396; [1960]
3 WLR 440; [1960] 3 All ER 1; (1960) 44 Cr App
R 246 (CA) . . . 255, 261
R v C [2009] UKHL 42 . . . 462
R v C (Sean Peter) [2001] EWCA Crim 1251;
[2001] 2 FLR 757; [2001] 3 FCR 409; [2001]
Crim LR 845; [2001] Fam Law 732 (CA) . . .
R v Cairns (John) [1999] 2 Cr App R 137
R v Cairns (Robert Emmett) (No.2) [2002] EWCA
Crim 533 (CA) . . . 876
R v Cakmak (Kenan) [2002] EWCA Crim 500;
[2002] 2 Cr App R 10; [2002] Crim LR 581
R v Caldwell (James); sub nom Commissioner of
Police of the Metropolis v Caldwell [1982] AC
(1981) 73 Cr App R 13 (HL) . . . 34, 144, 147,
147–8, 149–51, 154, 157, 160, 173, 174, 189, 278,
R v Calhaem (Kathleen Nell) [1985] QB 808;
[1985] 2 WLR 826; [1985] 2 All ER 226;
R v Campbell [1997] Crim LR 495 (CA) . . . 254
R v Campbell (Colin Frederick) (1987) 84 Cr App
R 255; [1986] Crim LR 257 (CA) . . . 255
R v Campbell (Tony) (1990) 93 Cr App R 350;
[1991] Crim LR 268 (CA) . . . 796–8
R v Camplin (Paul); sub nom DPP v Camplin
[1978] AC 705 (HL) . . . 250, 306, 320, 321
R v Carey [2006] EWCA Crim 17; [2006] Crim LR
R v Cascoe (Handel Barrington) [1970] 2 All ER
833; (1970) 54 Cr App R 401 (CA) . . . 243
R v Case (1850) 4 Cox CC 220 . . . 425
R v Cato (Ronald Philip) [1976] 1 WLR 110; [1976]
1 All ER 260; (1976) Cr App R 41 (CA) . . . 88,
R v Chambers [2008] EWCA Crim 2467 . . . 16
R v Chan-Fook (Mike) [1994] 1 WLR 689; (1994)
99 Cr App R 147 (CA) . . . 336, 339
R v Cheshire (David William) [1991] 1 WLR 844;
(CA) . . . 88, 95–7, 128, 129
R v Chrastny (Charlotte Barbara) (No.1) [1991] 1
WLR 1381 (CA) . . . 815
R v Church (Cyril David) [1966] 1 QB 59
(CCA) . . . 167, 269, 271
R v Clarence (Charles James) (1888) 22 QBD 23
(CCR) . . . 340, 358, 361
R v Clarke (Dennis Geoff rey) (1985) 80 Cr App R
R v Clarke (May) [1972] 1 All ER 219 (CA) . . . 694
R v Clarkson (David George) [1971] 1 WLR 1402;
(CMAC) . . . 864
R v Claydon [2005] EWCA Crim 2817 . . . 850
R v Clear (Thomas Walter) [1968] 1 QB 670; [1968]
2 WLR 122; [1968] 1 All ER 74 (CA) . . . 607,
R v Clegg (Lee William) [1995] 1 AC 482; [1995] 2
WLR 80; [1995] 1 All ER 334 (HL) . . . 653, 685
R v Clouden [1987] Crim LR 56 (CA) . . . 538
R v Clowes (Peter) (No.2) [1994] 2 All ER 316
R v Cockburn [2008] Crim LR 802 . . . 349, 389
R v Cocker [1989] Crim LR 740 (CA) . . . 265,
R v Cogan (John Rodney); R v Leak (Michael
Edward) [1976] QB 217 (CA) . . . 422, 855,
R v Cole [1994] Crim LR 582 (CA) . . . 666
R v Coles (Lee Henry) [1995] 1 Cr App R 157
R v Collins (1864) 9 Cox CC 497 . . . 802
R v Collins (Stephen William George) [1973]
QB 100; [1972] 3 WLR 243; [1972] 2 All ER
1105; (1972) 56 Cr App R 554 (CA) . . . 599,
R v Collister (Thomas James); R v Warhurst
(John) (1955) 39 Cr App R 100 (CA) . . . 606
R v Colohan see R v C (Sean Peter)
R v Concannon (John) [2002] Crim LR 213
R v Coney (1882) 8 QBD 534 (QBD) . . . 369, 864
R v Constanza (Gaetano) [1997] Crim LR 576
(DC); [1997] 2 Cr App R 492 (CA) . . . 326, 330
R v Conway (Francis Gerald) [1989] QB 290;
[1988] 3 WLR 1238; [1988] 3 All ER 1025; (1989)
R v Cooke (Anthony Martin) [1986] AC 909
R v Corbett (Christopher) [1996] Crim LR 594
R v Cort [2004] QB 388 . . . 358
R v Cotter (Christopher James) [2002] EWCA
Crim 1033; [2003] QB 951; [2003] 2 WLR 115;
R v Court (Robert Christopher) [1989] 1 AC 28
R v Cousins (Robert William) [1982] QB 526;
R v Cox (1992) 12 BMLR 38 . . . 83
R v Cramp (1880) 5 QBD 307 . . . 347
R v Croft (William James) [1944] KB 295; (1944)
29 Cr App R 169 (CCA) . . . 890
R v Cuerrier [1998] SCR (Canada) 371 . . . 413
R v Cunningham [1982] AC 566 (HL) . . . 240
R v Cunningham (Roy) [1957] 2 QB 396; [1957]
2 All ER 412 (CA) . . . 144–7, 149, 152, 173, 174,
185–6, 189, 204, 340, 342–3, 345, 348, 379, 496,
R v Curr (Patrick Vincent) [1968] 2 QB 944
R v Curtis [2010] EWCA Crim 123 . . . 353, 354
R v D [2005] EWCA Crim 1981 . . . 875
R v Dadson (1850) 4 Cox CC 358 . . . 650, 722
R v Dalby (Derek Shaun) [1982] 1 WLR 621;
(CA) . . . 92, 271
R v Dale (1852) 6 Cox CC 14 . . . 347
R v Dalloway (1847) 2 Cox 273 . . . 80
R v Dawson [1976] RTR 533; [1976] Crim LR 692
R v Dawson (Brian) (1985) 81 Cr App R 150
R v Day (1841) 9 C & P 722 . . . 441, 442
R v Day (Martin); R v Day (Simon) [2001] EWCA
Crim 1594; [2001] Crim LR 984 (CA) . . . 875
R v Dear [1996] Crim LR 595 (CA) . . . 101
| xliii
R v Devonald [2008] EWCA Crim 527 . . . 428–9
R v Deyemi [2007] EWCA Crim 2060 . . . 227
R v Dhaliwal [2006] EWCA Crim 1139 . . . 101,
R v Dias [2002] 2 Cr App R 96 . . . 91, 92
R v Dica (Mohammed) [2004] EWCA Crim 1103;
[2004] QB 1257 . . . 340, 345, 358–61, 362, 363,
R v Dietschmann (Anthony) (Appeal against
Conviction) [2003] UKHL 10; [2003] 1 AC
R v Ditchfield see Attorney General's Reference
(No.2 of 2004)
R v Ditta [1988] Crim LR 43 (CA) . . . 683
R v Donovan [1934] 2 KB 498 (CCA) . . . 336, 359,
R v Doring (Petra) [2002] EWCA Crim 1695
R v Dougal (Swansea Crown Court, 24 November
R v Doughty (Stephen Clifford) (1986) 83 Cr App
R v Doyle [2010] EWCA Crim 119 . . . 442
R v DPP [2001] Crim LR 397 (DC) . . . 356
R v DPP, ex p Kebelene [2000] 2 AC 326; [1999] 3
WLR 972; [1999] 4 All ER 801 (HL) . . . 47, 696
R v DPP, ex p Moseley (QBD, 23 June 1999) . . . 356
R v Drane [2008] EWCA Crim 1746 . . . 651
R v Drayton [2006] Crim LR 243 . . . 628
R v Drew (Martin Ralph) [2000] 1 Cr App R 91
R v Dudley [1989] Crim LR 57 (CA) . . . 629
R v Dudley (Thomas); R v Stephens (Edward)
(1884–85) 14 QBD 273 . . . 657, 658, 660, 663,
R v Duff y (Elizabeth Lilian) [1967] 1 QB 63
R v Dume (Constantine) (1986) The Times, 16
October (CA) . . . 330
R v Dunbar [1995] 1 Cr App R 280 (CA) . . . 514
R v Dunbar (Ronald Patrick) [1958] 1 QB 1 . . . 255
R v Duru (Ignatius Chima) [1974] 1 WLR 2;
R v Dyke and Munro [2001] EWCA Crim 2184;
[2002] 1 Cr App R 30 (CA) . . . 514
R v Dyson [1908] 2 KB 454 (CA) . . . 88
R v Dytham (Philip Thomas) [1979] QB 722;
[1979] 3 WLR 467; [1979] 3 All ER 641; (1979)
69 Cr App R 387 (CA) . . . 74
R v Eagleton (1855) Dears 315; (1855) 6 Cox CC
R v Easom (John Arthur) [1971] 2 QB 315; [1971] 3
WLR 82; [1971] 2 All ER 945 (CA) . . . 528
R v EB [2006] EWCA Crim 2945 (CA) . . . 425, 426
xliv |
R v Edwards [1991] Crim LR 45 (CA) . . . 821
R v Elbekkay [1995] Crim LR 163 (CA) . . .
R v Ellis (Ian); R v Street (Edward James); R v
Smith (Gloria Marie) (1987) 84 Cr App R 235
R v Emery (Sally Lorraine) (1993) 14 Cr App R (S)
394 (CA) . . . 74, 674
R v Emmett (1999) 18 June 1999 (CA), (1999) The
Times, 15 October . . . 359, 375
R v Enoch (1830) 5 C & P 539 . . . 239
R v Erisman [1988] 1 Hong Kong Law Reports
R v Evans and Gardiner (No.2) [1976] VR
523 . . . 96
R v Evans (Gemma) [2009] EWCA Crim
650 . . . 75, 79, 276
R v Fancy [1980] Crim LR 171 . . . 623
R v Faraj [2007] 2 Cr App R 25 . . . 648
R v Feely (David) [1973] QB 530 (CA) . . . 536,
R v Fegan [1972] NI 80 . . . 649
R v Fernandes (Roland Anthony) [1996] 1 Cr App
R 175 (CA) . . . 530
R v Field [1972] Crim LR 435 (CA) . . . 651
R v Finlay [2003] EWCA Crim 3668 . . . 91
R v Flatt (David Sean) [1996] Crim LR 576
R v Flattery (John) (1877) 2 QBD 410 . . . 427, 429
R v Forbes (Giles) [2001] UKHL 40; [2002] 2 AC
512; [2001] 3 WLR 428; [2001] 4 All ER 97
R v Forman and Ford [1988] Crim LR 677 (Crown
Ct) . . . 864
R v Forrester [1992] Crim LR 793 (CA) . . . 537
R v Forsyth (Elizabeth) [1997] 2 Cr App R 299
R v Fotheringham (William Bruce) (1989) 88 Cr
App R 206 (CA) . . . 379, 707
R v Francis [1982] Crim LR 363 (CA) . . . 605
R v Francom (Mark Frank) [2001] 1 Cr App R 237
R v Franklin (1883) 15 Cox CC 163 . . . 270
R v G [2006] EWCA Crim 821; [2008] UKHL
37 . . . 40, 52, 221, 222, 223–5, 435, 455–7
R v G [2010] EWCA Crim 1693 . . . 458
R v G and R [2002] EWCA Crim 1992; [2003]
UKHL 50; [2004] 1 AC 1034; [2003] 3 WLR
1060; [2003] 4 All ER 765; [2004] 1 Cr App R 21;
[2004] Crim LR 369 (HL) . . . 148–52, 154, 160,
R v Gallant [2008] EWCA Crim 1111 . . . 889
R v Gamble [1989] NI 268 . . . 873, 874
R v Garwood (Patrick Augustus) [1987] 1 WLR
319; [1987] 1 All ER 1032; (1987) 85 Cr App R
85; [1987] Crim LR 476 (CA) . . . 608–9
R v Geddes (Gary William) (1996) 160 JP 697;
[1996] Crim LR 894; (1996) 160 JPN 730
(CA) . . . 795–7
R v Gemmell [2002] EWCA Crim 1992; [2003] 1
Cr App R 343 . . . 224
R v George [1956] Crim LR 52 . . . 453
R v George (1960) 128 Can CC 289 . . . 160
R v Ghosh (Deb Baran) [1982] QB 1053; [1982] 3
R 154 (CA) . . . 524, 534–5, 536, 537, 544, 556,
561, 563–6, 573, 575, 576, 577, 583, 586, 827
R v Giannetto (Robert Vincent) [1997] 1 Cr App R
1 (CA) . . . 854–5, 858
R v Giaquinto (Andrew Pasquale) [2001] EWCA
Crim 2696 (CA) . . . 666
R v Gibbons and Proctor (1919) 13 Cr App R 134
R v Gibson (Richard Norman) [1990] 2 QB 619
R v Gilks (Donald) [1972] 1 WLR 1341; [1972] 3
All ER 280; (1972) 56 Cr App R 734 (CA) . . . 514
R v Gillard (Simon Paul) (1988) 87 Cr App R 189;
R v Gilmartin [1983] QB 953 . . . 571
R v Gleeson [2002] 1 Cr App R (S) 485 . . . 49
R v Gnango [2010] EWCA Crim 1691 . . . 862, 863
R v Goldman (Nigel) [1997] Crim LR 894
R v Goldshield Group plc [2008] UKHL 17 . . . 824
R v Gomez see DPP v Gomez (Edwin)
R v Goodall [2011] EWCA Crim 1887 . . . 536
R v Goodfellow (Kevin) (1986) 83 Cr App R 23
R v Gore [2007] EWCA Crim 2789; [2008] Crim
LR 388 . . . 266
R v Gotts (Benjamin) [1992] 2 AC 412
R v Gowans [2003] EWCA Crim 3935 . . . 102
R v Graham (Paul Anthony) [1982] 1 WLR 294;
(CA) . . . 668–71, 673, 677, 707
R v Grainge (Albert Robert Burns) [1974] 1 WLR
619; [1974] 1 All ER 928 (CA) . . . 163
R v Grant (Heather) [2001] EWCA Crim
2611; [2002] QB 1030; [2002] 2 WLR 1409
R v Greatrex (David Anthony) [1999] 1 Cr App R
R v Green [2002] EWCA Crim 1501 . . . 427, 429
R v Greenstein (Allan) [1975] 1 WLR 1353; [1976]
1 All ER 1; (1975) 61 Cr App R 296 . . . 535
R v Gregory [2011] EWCA Crim 1712 . . . 215, 669
R v Griffi n [1993] Crim LR 514 . . . 798
R v Griffiths (1965) Cr App R 94 (CA) . . . 814
R v Griffiths (Leslie George) (1974) 60 Cr App R
14 (CA) . . . 164, 544
R v Gross (1913) 77 JP 352 . . . 165
R v Grout [2011] EWCA Crim 299 . . . 454, 455
R v Grundy [1977] Crim LR 543 (CA) . . . 339
R v Gullefer (Ian John) [1990] 1 WLR 1063; [1990]
3 All ER 882; [1991] Crim LR 576 (CA) . . . 795,
R v H [2002] 1 Cr App R 59 . . . 41, 52
R v H [2007] EWCA Crim 2056 . . . 439
R v H (Fitness to Plead) [2003] UKHL 1; [2003]
1 WLR 411; [2003] 1 All ER 497; [2003] 2 Cr
App R 2; (2003) 167 JP 125; [2003] HRLR 19
(HL) . . . 698–700
R v H (Karl Anthony) [2005] EWCA Crim 732;
[2005] 1 All ER 859; [2005] 2 Cr App R 9; [2005]
1 WLR 2005; [2005] Crim LR 735 . . . 452
R v Hadjou (George) (1989) 11 Cr App R (S) 29
R v Hale (Robert Angus) (1979) 68 Cr App R 415;
R v Hales (Ricky) [2005] EWCA Crim
1118 . . . 135, 137
R v Hall (1928) 21 Cr App R 48 . . . 252
R v Hall (Edward Leonard) (1985) 81 Cr App R
260; [1985] Crim LR 377 (CA) . . . 544, 810
R v Hall (Geoff rey) [1973] QB 126; [1972] 3 WLR
547 (CA) . . . 514–15
R v Hallam see R v Hallam and Blackburn
R v Hallam and Blackburn [1995] Crim LR 323
R v Hamilton [2007] EWCA Crim 2062 . . . 824
R v Hammond [1982] Crim LR 611 . . . 585
R v Hancock (Reginald Dean); R v Shankland
(Russell) [1986] AC 455 (HL) . . . 135, 136,
R v Hapgood (Elijah); R v Wyatt (Aaron)
(1865–72) LR 1 CCR 221 . . . 886
R v Haque [2011] EWCA Crim 1871 . . . 356
R v Hardie (Paul Deverall) [1985] 1 WLR 64;
[1984] 3 All ER 848 (CA) . . . 156
R v Harley (1830) 4 C & P 396 . . . 347
R v Harling [1938] 1 All ER 307 (CCA) . . . 435
R v Harmer (Geoff rey Clive) [2001] EWCA Crim
2930; [2002] Crim LR 401 (CA) . . . 672
R v Harmer (Roy Peter) [2005] EWCA Crim 1;
[2005] 2 Cr App R 2 . . . 816
R v Harry [1974] Crim LR 32 . . . 610
R v Hart [1986] 2 NZLR 408 (NZCA) . . . 102
R v Harvey (Alfred Alphonsus); R v Ulyett
(Ernest); R v Plummer (Lucius Everard)
R v Harvey (Ian) (No.1) [1999] Crim LR 70
R v Hasan [2005] 4 All ER 685 . . . 767
| xlv
R v Hatton (Jonathan) [2005] EWCA Crim 2951;
[2006] 1 Cr App R 16 . . . 651, 707
R v Hayes [2002] All ER (D) 6 (CA) . . . 138,
R v Hayward (1908) 21 Cox CC 692 . . . 102, 277
R v Heard [2007] EWCA Crim 125 . . . 157–62,
R v Heath (Patrick Nicholas) [2000] Crim LR 109
R v Hegarty [1994] Crim LR 353 (CA) . . . 674
R v Henderson (DC, 29 November 1984) . . . 623
R v Henley (Clifford James) (Appeal against
Conviction) [2000] Crim LR 582 (CA) . . . 356
R v Hennessy (Andrew Michael) [1989] 1 WLR
287; [1989] 2 All ER 9; (1989) 89 Cr App R 10
(CA) . . . 226, 687, 689, 696, 741
R v Hennigan (James) [1971] 3 All ER 133
R v Herbert (1960) The Times, 22
R v Hess; R v Nguyen [1990] 2 SCR 906 . . . 225,
R v Hibbert (1865–72) LR 1 CCR 184 . . . 215
R v Hibbert (1995) 99 CCC (3d) 193 . . . 676
R v Higgins (1801) 2 East 5 . . . 788
R v Hill (Frederick Philip) (1986) 83 Cr App R
386; [1986] Crim LR 815 (HL) . . . 348
R v Hill (Ronald) [2008] EWCA Crim 76 . . . 249
R v Hill (Valerie Mary); R v Hall (Jennifer)
(1989) 89 Cr App R 74; [1989] Crim LR 136
R v Hills [2001] Crim LR 318 (CA) . . . 353
R v Hinks (Karen Maria) [2001] 2 AC 241; [2000]
3 WLR 1590; [2000] 4 All ER 833 (HL) . . . 516,
517, 520–5, 549, 555–9, 561, 578
R v Hitchens [2011] EWCA Crim 1626 . . . 647–8
R v HM Coroner for West London, ex p Gray
[1988] QB 467 . . . 278
R v Holden [1991] Crim LR 478 (CA) . . . 533
R v Holland (1841) 2 Mood & R 351 . . . 100
R v Hollinshead (Peter Gordon) [1985] 1 All ER
850 (CA); [1985] AC 975; [1985] 3 WLR 159;
[1985] 2 All ER 769; (1985) 81 Cr App R 364;
[1985] Crim LR 653; (1985) 82 LSG 2739; (1985)
135 NLJ 631; (1985) 129 SJ 447 (HL) . . . 824,
R v Hollis [1971] Crim LR 525 (CA) . . . 598
R v Hood [2003] EWCA Crim 2772 . . . 74
R v Horne [1994] Crim LR 584 (CA) . . . 674
R v Howard (Robert Lesarian) [1966] 1 WLR 13;
[1965] 3 All ER 684 (CCA) . . . 435
R v Howe (Michael Anthony) [1987] AC 417;
85 Cr App R 32; (1987) 151 JP 265; [1987] Crim
LR 480 (HL) . . . 283, 657, 659, 660, 666–8, 669,
xlvi |
R v Howells (Colin David) [1977] QB 614
R v Hudson (Linda) and Taylor [1971] 2 QB 202;
[1971] 2 WLR 1047; [1971] 2 All ER 244; (1972)
56 Cr App R 1 (CA) . . . 672, 751, 754
R v Hudson (Terence) [1966] 1 QB 448
R v Hunt (Anthony Gerald) (1978) 66 Cr App R
105 (CA) . . . 625–7
R v Hurst (Marnie Michelle) [1995] 1 Cr App R 82
R v Hussain, Bhatti and Bhatti [2002] Crim LR
R v Hussain and Hussain [2010] EWCA Crim
R v Hussey (1924) 18 Cr App R 160 . . . 648
R v Husseyn (1978) 67 Cr App R 131 (CA) . . . 794
R v Hyde (David Charles) [1991] 1 QB 134
R v Inglis [2010] EWCA Crim 2637 . . . 240, 245,
R v Instan [1893] 1 QB 450 (QBD) . . . 75
R v Ireland [1997] QB 114; [1996] 3 WLR 650;
[1997] 1 All ER 112 . . . 327, 328–9
R v Ireland (Robert Matthew); R v Burstow
(Anthony Christopher) [1998] AC 147; [1997]
App R 177; (1997) 161 JP 569; [1998] 1 FLR 105;
[1997] Crim LR 810 (HL) . . . 270, 326, 327, 328,
329, 333, 337, 338, 339, 340, 343, 344, 345, 358,
R v Isitt (Douglas Lance) (1978) 67 Cr App R 44;
[1978] RTR 211 (CA) . . . 226, 689
R v Jackson [1985] Crim LR 444 (CA) . . . 817
R v James (1837) 8 C & P 131; (1837) 173 ER
R v James [2006] Crim LR 629 . . . 354
R v Janjua (Nadeem Ahmed) [1999] 1 Cr App R 91
R v Jennings [1990] Crim LR 588 (CA) . . . 270
R v JF Alford Transport Ltd [1997] 2 Cr App
R 326; [1999] RTR 51; [1997] Crim LR 745
R v Jheeta [2007] EWCA Crim 1699 . . . 426–8,
R v Jobidon [1991] 2 SCR 714 . . . 375
R v Johnson [2007] EWCA Crim 1978 . . . 695
R v Johnston [2007] EWCA Crim 3133 . . . 271, 272
R v Johnstone (Robert Alexander) [2003] UKHL
28; [2003] 1 WLR 1736 HL . . . 47, 48
R v Jones [2006] UKHL 16 . . . 46, 625
R v Jones [2007] EWCA Crim 1118 . . . 455, 684
R v Jones (James) [2010] EWCA Crim 925 . . .
R v Jones (John); R v Smith (Christopher) [1976] 1
WLR 672; [1976] 3 All ER 54; (1976) 63 Cr App
R 47 (CA) . . . 602, 603–4
R v Jones (Jonathan Nigel) [2001] EWCA Crim
R v Jones (Kenneth Henry) [1990] 1 WLR
1057; [1990] 3 All ER 886; 91 Cr App R 351
R v Jones (Margaret) [2005] QB 259 . . . 756
R v Jones (Terence) (1986) 83 Cr App R 375
R v Jordan (James Clinton) (1956) 40 Cr App R
152 (CA) . . . 95, 96
R v Jordan (Shirley) [2001] 2 WLR 211
R v JTB [2009] UKHL 20 . . . 701
R v K (Age of Consent: Reasonable Belief) [2001]
UKHL 41; [2002] 1 AC 462; [2001] 3 WLR 471;
[2001] 3 All ER 897 (HL) . . . 219–21
R v Kai-Whitewind [2006] Crim LR 348 . . . 266
R v Kaitamaki [1985] AC 147 (PC) . . . 423
R v Kanwar (Rena Louise) [1982] 1 WLR 845;
[1982] 2 All ER 528; (1982) 75 Cr App R 87
R v Keane [2010] EWCA Crim 2514 . . . 644, 650,
R v Kelly [1992] Crim LR 181 (CA) . . . 798
R v Kelly (Anthony Noel) [1999] QB 621; [1999] 2
WLR 384; [1998] 3 All ER 741 (CA) . . . 511, 513
R v Kelly (Ronnie Peter) (1993) 97 Cr App R 245;
R v Kemp (Albert) [1957] 1 QB 399 . . . 693, 694
R v Kennedy [2007] UKHL 38 . . . 87, 90–2, 272,
R v Kenning [2008] EWCA Crim 1534 . . . 799,
R v Kenny [2005] EWCA Crim 1415; [2005] 1
WLR 3642; [2005] 2 Cr App R 34 . . . 681, 682
R v Khan (Mohammed Iqbal); R v Mohammed
Iqbal Khan; R v Dhokia (Mahesh); R v Banga
(Jaswinder Singh); R v Faiz (Navaid) [1990] 1
R 29 (CA) . . . 496, 789–90, 792–4
R v Khan (Rungzabe); R v Khan (Tahir) [1998]
Crim LR 830 (CA) . . . 79, 270
R v Khan (Uzma) [2009] EWCA Crim 2 . . . 282
R v Kimsey [1996] Crim LR 35 (CA) . . . 88
R v Kingston (Barry) [1995] 2 AC 355; [1994] 3
(HL) . . . 147, 702–5, 706, 758–61
R v Kirk [2008] EWCA Crim 434 . . . 443
R v Kitson (Herbert) (1955) 39 Cr App R 66
R v Klineberg (Jonathan Simon) and Marsden
[1999] 1 Cr App R 427 (CA) . . . 515
R v Konzani [2005] EWCA Crim 706 . . . 361–3,
R v Kumar [2005] 1 Cr App R 34 . . . 221
R v Kumar [2006] EWCA Crim 1946 . . . 453
R v L [2010] EWCA Crim 1249 . . . 89
R v Lamb (Terence Walter) [1967] 2 QB 981
R v Lambert [2009] EWCA Crim 2860 . . . 608
R v Lambert (Steven) [2001] UKHL 37; [2002] 2
AC 545; [2001] 3 WLR 206 (HL) . . . 47–9, 227–8
R v Lambie [1982] AC 449 . . . 571
R v Lang (Christopher Michael) (1976) 62 Cr App
R 50 (CA) . . . 436
R v Larkin (1943) 29 Cr App R 18 . . . 268, 285
R v Larsonneur (1933) 149 LT 542 . . . 86
R v Lartner [1995] Crim LR 75 (CA) . . . 434
R v Latif (Khalid) [1996] 1 WLR 104; [1996] 1 All
ER 353 (HL) . . . 90, 93, 684
R v Lavallee [1990] 1 SCR 852 . . . 311
R v Lawrence (Alan) [1972] AC 626 (HL) . . .
518–23, 554, 557
R v Lawrence (Rodney Brian); R v Pomroy
(Norman Albert) (1973) 57 Cr App R 64
R v Lawrence (Stephen Richard) [1982] AC
(HL) . . . 148, 149, 273, 274
R v Le Brun [1991] 4 All ER 673 (CA) . . . 167
R v Leather (Nicola Jane) (1993) 14 Cr App R (S)
R v Lee [2005] EWCA Crim 1415; [2006] 1 All ER
R v Lewis [1970] Crim LR 647 . . . 98, 99
R v Lewis [2005] Crim LR 797 . . . 684
R v Lewis (Rhys) [2010] EWCA Crim 496 . . . 875
R v Lewis (Robert Walter) [2010] EWCA Crim
R v Lidar [2000] 4 Archbold News 3 . . . 278
R v Light (1857) D & B 332 . . . 387
R v Linekar (Gareth) [1995] QB 250; [1995] 2 WLR
237; [1995] 3 All ER 69; [1995] 2 Cr App R 49;
[1995] Crim LR 320 (CA) . . . 427–9, 484
R v Lipman (Robert) (1969) 55 Cr App R 600;
[1970] 1 QB 152 (CA) . . . 158, 689, 696
R v Litchfield [1998] Crim LR 507 (CA) . . . 276
R v Lloyd (Sidney Douglas); R v Bhuee (Ranjeet);
R v Ali (Mohammed) [1985] QB 829; [1985] 2
R v Lomas (1913) 9 Cr App R 220 . . . 868
R v Looseley [2001] 4 All ER 897 (HL) . . . 684
R v Loukes [1996] Crim LR 341 (CA) . . . 887
R v Lowe (Robert) [1973] 1 QB 702 (CA) . . . 74, 270
R v Luff man [2008] EWCA Crim 1379 . . . 859
R v Lunderbech [1991] Crim LR 784 (CA) . . . 824
R v Lynsey (Jonathan Simon) [1995] 3 All ER 654
R v McAllister (Geoff rey Victor) [1997] Crim LR
R v McCarthy (Michael Reginald) [1967] 1 QB 68
| xlvii
R v McCrudden [2005] EWCA Crim 466 . . . 222
R v McDavitt [1981] Crim LR 843 (CA) . . . 585
R v McDonnell [1966] 1 QB 233 . . . 815
R v McFall [1994] Crim LR 226 . . . 435
R v McInnes (Walter) [1971] 1 WLR 1600; [1971] 3
R v McKechnie (Roy Maurer) (1992) 94 Cr App R
51; [1992] Crim LR 194 (CA) . . . 102
R v McNaghten (1843) 10 Cl & F 200; (1843–60)
All ER Rep 229 . . . 687, 692–4
R v McNamara (James) (1988) 87 Cr App R
R v McNamara (Richard) [2009] EWCA Crim
R v McShane (Yolande Tregenna) (1977) 66 Cr
R v Mahmood (Asaf) [1995] RTR 48; [1994] Crim
LR 368 (CA) . . . 875
R v Makuwa [2006] Crim LR 911 . . . 47
R v Malcherek (Richard Tadeusz); R v Steel
(Anthony) [1981] 1 WLR 690; [1981] 2 All ER
422 (CA) . . . 87, 93, 96, 239
R v Malone (Thomas Patrick) [1998] 2 Cr App
R v Mandair (Singh Mandair) [1995] 1 AC 208
R v Marby (1882) 8 QBD 571 . . . 80
R v Marcus (Lily) [1981] 1 WLR 774; [1981] 2 All
ER 833; (1981) 73 Cr App R 49; [1981] Crim LR
490; 125 SJ 396 (CA) . . . 347
R v Marison (Lee John) [1997] RTR 457; [1996]
R v Marjoram [2000] Crim LR 372 (CA) . . . 99
R v Marks (Errington Lloyd) [1998] Crim LR 676
R v Marlow (1964) 49 Cr App R 49 . . . 347
R v Marriott (Charles Percival) [1971] 1 WLR 187;
R v Marshall (Adrian John) [1998] 2 Cr App R 282
(CA) . . . 512, 530–2
R v Martin (1827) 172 ER 390 . . . 97
R v Martin (1832) 5 C & P 128 . . . 100
R v Martin (1891) 8 QBD 54, CCR . . . 332
R v Martin (Anthony Edward) [2001] EWCA
Crim 2245; [2003] QB 1; [2002] 2 WLR 1
(CA) . . . 644–6, 648, 649
R v Martin (Colin) [1989] 1 All ER 652; (1989) 88
Cr App R 343 (CA) . . . 656, 666, 680, 707
R v Masciantonio (1994–5) 183 CLR 58 (Aus
HC) . . . 308, 312
R v Matthews (Darren John) [2003] EWCA Crim
192 (CA) . . . 141, 142
R v Matudi (Misanki Kuranku) [2003] EWCA
Crim 697 (CA) . . . 221, 222
R v Mavji (Ramniklal Nathoo) [1987] 1 WLR
1388; [1987] 2 All ER 758; [1986] STC 508;
xlviii |
(1987) 84 Cr App R 34; [1987] Crim LR 39;
(1987) 131 SJ 1121 (CA) . . . 73
R v Maxwell (Nolan Andrew) (1994) 158 JP 877;
R v Maxwell-King (Paul John) [2001] 2 Cr App
R (S) 136; (2001) 145 SJLB 21 (CA) . . . 631
R v MD [2004] EWCA Crim 1391 . . . 137
R v Meachen [2009] EWCA Crim 1701 . . . 339
R v Meade and Belt (1823) 1 Lew 184 . . . 328
R v Mellor (Gavin Thomas) [1996] 2 Cr App R
R v Mendez [2010] EWCA Crim 516 . . . 856, 859,
R v Mensah-Lartey (Godso Ni Boye); R v Relevy
(Devora) [1996] 1 Cr App R 143 (CA) . . . 508
R v Merrick (David Stephen) [1995] Crim LR 802;
R v Meyrick (1929) 21 Cr App R 523 (CA) . . . 814
R v Michael (1840) 9 C & P 356 . . . 103, 855
R v Millard and Vernon [1987] Crim LR 393
R v Miller (James) [1983] 2 AC 161; [1983] 2 WLR
539; [1983] 1 All ER 978; (1983) 77 Cr App R 17
(HL) . . . 71, 77–9, 168
R v Mills (Thomas Leonard Lantey) [1963] 1 QB
(1963) 47 Cr App R 49 (CA) . . . 814
R v Millward (Sidney Booth) (1994) 158 JP 1091;
[1994] Crim LR 527 (CA) . . . 861, 862, 887
R v Misra [2004] EWCA Crim 2375; [2005] 1 Cr
App R 21 . . . 274–6
R v Mitchell [1993] Crim LR 788 (CA) . . . 531
R v Mitchell (Frank) (1999) 163 JP 75; [1999] Crim
R v Mitchell (Laura) [2008] EWCA Crim
R v Mitchell (Ronald James) [1983] QB 741; [1983]
R v Mitchell (Walter Joby) [2008] EWCA Crim
R v M'Loughlin (1838) 173 ER 651 . . . 338
R v Mohammed [2005] EWCA Crim 1880 . . .
R v Moloney (Alistair Baden) [1985] AC 905
(HL) . . . 135, 136, 137, 140, 141, 144, 161,
R v Moor (Newcastle Crown Court, 11 May
R v Moore and Dorn [1975] Crim LR 229
R v Morgan (William Anthony) see DPP v
Morgan (William Anthony) [1976]
R v Morhall (Alan Paul) [1996] AC 90
R v Morley and Hutton [1994] Crim LR
R v Morris (Clarence Barrington) [1998] 1 Cr App
R v Morris (David Alan); sub nom Anderton v
Burnside [1984] AC 320 (HL) . . . 517, 518,
R v Morris (Emmanuel) [1966] 2 QB 110; [1966] 2
WLR 1195 . . . 871, 873, 874
R v Morrison (Lawrence Andrew) (1989) 89 Cr
R v Moses and Ansbro [1991] Crim LR 617
R v Mowatt (Sidney Linton) [1968] 1 QB 421;
[1967] 3 All ER 47 (CA) . . . 342, 343
R v Moyles [2009] Crim LR 586 . . . 697
R v Moys (1984) 79 Cr App R 72 . . . 810
R v Muhamad (Mithum) [2002] EWCA Crim
R v N [2007] EWCA Crim 3479 . . . 672
R v Nabina (Fizeal) [2000] Crim LR 481
R v Nash (Denis Arthur) [1999] Crim LR 308
R v Neary (Graham Robert) [2002] EWCA Crim
R v Nedrick (Ransford Delroy) [1986] 1 WLR 1025
(CA) . . . 138, 139, 141, 142, 176, 183
R v Ness [2011] Crim LR 645 . . . 668
R v New Forest Local Education Authority [2007]
R v O'Connor (1980) 54 AJLR 349 . . . 197
R v O'Connor [1991] Crim LR 135 (CA) . . . 707
R v O'Donnell [2010] EWCA Crim 1480 . . . 345
R v O'Flaherty [2004] EWCA Crim 526 . . . 891
R v O'Grady (Patrick Gerald) [1987] QB 995;
R v Ogunbowale [2007] EWCA Crim 2739 . . . 135
R v O'Hadhmaill [1996] Crim LR 509
R v Olan [1978] 2 SCR 1175 (Canada) . . . 826
R v O'Leary (Michael) (1986) 82 Cr App R 341
R v Olugboja (Stephen Olubumni) [1982] QB 320;
[1981] 3 WLR 585; [1981] 3 All ER 443; (1981) 73
Cr App R 344 (CA) . . . 440–2, 486
R v Ortiz (Fernando) (1986) 83 Cr App R 173
R v Osborn (1919) 84 JP 63 . . . 797
R v Osborne [2010] EWCA Crim 547 . . . 257
R v Osolin [1993] 4 SCR 595 . . . 466
R v Otway [2011] EWCA Crim 3 . . . 889
R v Owino (Nimrod) [1996] 2 Cr App R 128;
R v Paddison see R v Quick (William George) and
Paddison [1973]
R v Pagett (David Keith) (1983) 76 Cr App R 279;
[1983] Crim LR 393 (CA) . . . 93
R v Papadimitropoulos (1957) 31 ALJ 784; (1957)
98 CLR 249 (Aus HC) . . . 484
R v Paquette (1997) 70 DLR (3d) 129
(Canada) . . . 752
R v Parker [1977] 1 All ER 760 (CA) . . . 155
R v Parker (Daryl Clive) [1977] 1 WLR 600; [1977]
2 All ER 37; (1977) 63 Cr App R 211 . . . 145–7,
R v Parkes [1973] Crim LR 358 . . . 607
R v Pattni, Dhunna, Soni and Poopalarajah [2001]
R v Pearman (Stephen Dennis) (1984) 80 Cr App
R v Pembiliton (1874) 2 CCC 119 . . . 165
R v Perman (Sam) [1996] 1 Cr App R 24; [1995]
R v Peters; R v Parfitt [1995] Crim LR 501
R v Phillips [2004] EWCA Crim 112 . . . 137
R v Pitchley (1973) 57 Cr App R 30 (CA) . . . 541
R v Pitham (Charles Henry); R v Hehl (Brian
Robert) (1977) 65 Cr App R 45 (CA) . . . 517
R v Pittwood (1902) 19 TLR 37 . . . 74
R v Podola (Guenther Fritz Erwin) [1960] 1 QB
R v Pommell (Fitzroy Derek) [1995] 2 Cr App R
R v Ponting (Central Criminal Court, 11
February 1985) . . . 203
R v Poulton (1832) 5 C & P 329 . . . 239
R v Powell (Anthony Glassford); R v Daniels
(Antonio Eval); R v English (Philip) [1999] 1
AC 1; [1997] 3 WLR 959; [1997] 4 All ER 545;
[1998] 1 Cr App R 261; (1998) 162 JP 1; [1998]
Crim LR 48 (HL) . . . 288, 868, 869, 870–5,
876–8, 880, 883, 895, 909
R v Preddy (John Crawford) [1996] AC 815; [1996]
3 WLR 255 (HL) . . . 531
R v Prentice [1994] QB 302; [1993] 4 All ER 935
R v Quayle [2005] EWCA Crim 1415; [2005] 1
WLR 3642; [2006] 1 All ER 988 . . . 656, 670,
R v Quick (William George) and Paddison [1973]
QB 910 (CA) . . . 156, 687, 689, 721
R v R (Rape: Marital Exemption) [1992] 1 AC
R v R (Stephen Malcolm) (1984) 79 Cr App R
R v Rabey (1980) 15 CR (3d) 225 (Canada) . . . 689
R v Rafferty [2007] EWCA Crim 1846 . . . 89, 876
R v Rahman [2008] UKHL 45 . . . 862, 876, 877,
878–82, 883
R v Rai (Thomas) [2000] 1 Cr App R 242
R v Ram (1893) 17 Cox CC 609 . . . 887
| xlix
R v Ramchurn [2010] EWCA Crim 194 . . . 257–8
R v Raphael [2008] EWCA Crim 1014 . . . 529
R v Rashford [2006] EWCA Crim 3377 . . .
R v Reader (Alfred Raymond) (1978) 66 Cr App R
R v Reardon [1999] Crim LR 392 . . . 87


rologists at Health and Hopes provide diagnosis and treatment for diseases of the urinary tract, including urologic cancers, male sexual dysfunction, urinary incontinence, pelvic pain, urinary stone disease, male infertility and prostate disease. We also perform urinary tract reconstruction. New treatment techniques are available to patients with a variety of disorders.