R v Bagley
1980
Posted By lanbuk.com
- Facts
- Bagley is named with Prater and Loveridge for the limit on the warning. It does not describe the charge, the witness or the result.
- Issue
- Must the judge give a prosecution-accomplice warning when the witness is called for the defence?
- Held
- The answer is no. Prater is the reported case. Bagley is the name only.
- Principle
- The warning in Davies v DPP is for an accomplice called by the Crown. A defence witness is not in that class.
- Why it matters
- Included so the name can be found.
Words and Latin in this note
- Accomplice
- A witness who was a party to the offence, a receiver giving evidence against the thieves, or a party to another offence the prosecution uses to prove the charge. If the prosecution calls him, the judge warns the jury of the danger of convicting on his evidence alone. Open the note.
For study only. By lanbuk.com. Always check current sources and consult a qualified professional.