R v BKR
[2023] EWCA Crim 903
R v BKJ
17 September 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 1354
Court of Appeal
A man was accused of rape. The judge stopped the trial because he thought the police investigation was flawed. A higher court disagreed, saying the police mistakes weren't bad enough to cancel the trial, so there will be a new trial with a different judge.
Key Facts
- •The prosecution appealed a Crown Court judge's decision to stay proceedings against BKJ, accused of rape and assault by penetration.
- •BKJ admitted sexual activity but claimed consent, alleging complainant collusion.
- •The police delayed obtaining complainants' phones for over three months, leading to allegations of lost evidence and potential for evidence deletion.
- •The investigating officer's conduct was questioned, including allegations of leading questions, incomplete record-keeping, and prioritizing 'building a case' over impartial investigation.
- •The defense argued that a fair trial was impossible due to police failures (Category 1 abuse) and that the officer's conduct offended the court's sense of justice (Category 2 abuse).
- •The judge stayed proceedings based on the officer's conduct, finding it an abuse of process.
- •The prosecution appealed the stay, arguing the judge erred in law and principle.
Legal Principles
Stay of proceedings as an abuse of process is an exceptional remedy, a measure of last resort.
R v Ng and O'Reilly [2024] EWCA Crim 493
Category 2 abuse of process requires misconduct by prosecutorial authorities, evaluated by balancing public interest in prosecution with maintaining confidence in the criminal justice system.
R v Ng and O'Reilly [2024] EWCA Crim 493
Section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 governs prosecution appeals against trial rulings.
Criminal Justice Act 2003
Section 67 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 outlines grounds for the Court of Appeal to reverse a ruling (wrong in law, error of law or principle, unreasonable ruling).
Criminal Justice Act 2003
Rule 3.28(2) of the Criminal Procedure Rules sets out requirements for applying for a stay of proceedings.
Criminal Procedure Rules
Outcomes
The Court of Appeal granted leave to appeal and reversed the judge's decision to stay proceedings.
The judge erred in law; the alleged police failures, while relevant for the jury's consideration, did not constitute grounds for a stay of proceedings. The judge failed to properly balance the public interest in prosecution against concerns about the integrity of the criminal justice system. The criticisms of the police officer's conduct were not serious enough to warrant a stay and did not prevent a fair trial.
A retrial was ordered, to be heard by a different judge.
To ensure fairness and address concerns about the previous judge's handling of the case.