|
|
|
CRIMINAL LAW, EVIDENCE AND PROCEDURE - INFORMATION – DUPLICITY – HARASSMENT – DEFENDANT CHARGED WITH PURSUING COURSE OF CONDUCT AMOUNTING TO HARASSMENT OF HUSBAND AND WIFE – WHETHER INFORMATION BAD FOR DUPLICITY – PROTECTION FROM HARASSMENT ACT 1997
The respondent, D, lived next to Mr and Mrs B. Various disputes arose between D and Mr and Mrs B over the boundaries of the respective properties. Mr and Mrs B complained that D was harassing them and D was charged with pursuing a course of conduct in breach of s 1 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 which amounted to harassment of Mr and Mrs B and which he knew or ought to have known, amounted to such harassment, contrary to s 2 of the 1997 Act. D pleaded not guilty, but was found guilty by the justices. He appealed to the Crown Court, submitting that the charge was duplicitous because it named two complainants. The Crown Court allowed the appeal. The prosecution appealed by way of case stated.
Held – Where the prosecution case was that the complainants were a close but definable group a charge would not be bad for duplicity in referring to two complainants, nor did it matter that only one of the complainants might have been present on any particular occasion when harassment was alleged to have taken place. In the instant case, the husband and wife complainants had been living in the same property and had been harassed in relation to that property. It was true that evidence might be given of incidents when only one of the complainants were present, but provided those incidents were part of a course of conduct aimed at the definable group the charge would be made out. The case would be remitted to the Crown Court for it to proceed with the hearing of the charge. The appeal would be allowed.
This article is for information purposes only; its aim is to let people to know their full rights under UK law. Nothing on these pages is absolute as the law is always changing; if in doubt contact a trusted solicitor for further advice. We do not encourage you to break the law.
Please feel free to copy and distribute these articles to fellow activists, but do not alter the text in any way. These articles are anti-copyright for non-commercial purposes. Please visit www.freebeagles.org for the latest version of our articles and to learn about the freeBEAGLES Ethical Open Document License under which this document is distributed.
If you see any errors, or we have missed any changes to the legal situation please contact us as soon as possible, at info@freebeagles.org, as wrong information can prove costly to people's freedom.
© Copyright freeB.E.A.G.L.E.S.; last updated: November 2003