Retrials
Court Retrials have been utilised in very high-profile cases in recent times. Cases have been reopened in the past 11 years due to a change in the law that prevented ‘double jeopardy’. This law prevented people from being tried twice for the same offence.
It is now possible for serious criminal cases to be re-trialled when new evidence has come to light. For example, the murder cases of Stephen Lawrence and Julie Hogg had been reopened, in both cases new verdicts were ruled.
Prior to 2005, no individual was allowed to be tried twice for the same charge when they had received an acquittal. However, new advancements in fingerprint matching technology and DNA testing has created opportunities for new, compelling evidence to be found. This new evidence would prove useful and was changed in the interests of justice.
What are retrials?
Retrials are now an important aspect of the criminal justice system, as they ensure the law is upheld and justice is served based on all available evidence, not simply at the time of the first trial. Retrials can also ensure that cases are conducted in the best possible manner.
Many retrials are granted due to the nature of the case, and as such retrials are typically used for the most serious high-profile cases, in particular murders and serious sex crimes.
There are a number of reasons that a retrial can be called, including situations where compelling evidence has come to light, or where jurors were found to have been interfered with.
Reasons for a retrial
Jurors Fail to Agree on a Verdict
In Crown Court Trials, jurors are expected to reach a unanimous verdict (or at least a supermajority), but in reality this is not always possible. In situations where there is a hung jury, a retrial may be granted if it is in the interests of justice.
If granted, a retrial would typically take place within 14 days after the verdict was given, however, this may be shorted to 7 days if the defendant is required to remain in custody.
In the case of a hung jury at the retrial, a third trial is not typically granted unless it is deemed necessary, and the case in hand is severe.
Magistrates Fail to Agree on a Verdict
On the final day of a Magistrates’ Court Trial, Magistrates are obligated to come to a final verdict. In ideal circumstances, the bench would comprise of an odd number of Magistrates, avoiding the possibility of a split decision.
If, by chance, there is a split decision and the Magistrates fail to agree a verdict, then the court can arrange a retrial of it’s own volition, with the permission of the reviewing lawyer. Not all cases are suitable for a retrial.
Court of Appeal Order a Retrial
Only a small number of appeals are actually successful processed through the Court of Appeal, in 2011 over 1.5 million civil cases were heard by UK courts, whilst just over 1,200 appeals were filed by the Court of Appeal.
The Court of Appeal deals with civil and criminal cases, and reviews appeals against convictions made in the Crown Court. Also, an Attorney General may appeal against a conviction if the sentence is unduly lenient or following an acquittal.
Appeals may also be filed on the basis of new evidence coming to light, but this compelling evidence must be reviewed by the Court of Appeal in order for a retrial to be successfully granted.
Retrial following a Tainted Acquittal
The High Court has the power to order an acquittal to be quashed, based on Sections 54 – 57 of the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996. A tainted acquittal is where an acquittal had resulted from the interference with, or intimidation of, a juror, witness or potential witness.
In these circumstances, an acquitted individual may be retried for the original offence and, depending on circumstances, offences relating to the Administration of Justice.
Retrial under Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Act
Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Act was reformed when the ‘double jeopardy’ law was removed. When this law was removed, many high-profile and serious crimes where new evidence had come to light could be retried.
When new evidence comes to light, it must first be reviewed by the Director of Public Prosecution, and only after the written consent is provided by the DPP may the case be re-trialled.
Retrial Decision Factors
Decisions to grant retrials are typically taken as a last resort, as pressure on the Courts means that cases need to be efficient and effective. Very few retrials are granted through the Court of Appeal, and are only typically granted if it can be proved the new evidence is compelling enough to warrant a retrial.
The following list of factors are considered by the DPP, Magistrates’ and Court of Appeal when making a decision as to whether to grant a retrial.
Nature of the case
Typically, only cases of a serious nature will be considered for a retrial, and based on the evidence presented in the first trial, a decision will be made of whether there is a realistic chance of prosecution.
Witnesses will also need to be able and willing to provide evidence again, as witness availability can cause issues, especially if there was reluctance to provide evidence during the initial trial.
Reasons why a verdict was not found
If the verdict was perverse – in other words against what would be considered outside of a ‘normal’ or ‘reasonable’ verdict – then there is likely to be a strong case for a retrial.
There may have also been external factors influencing the decisions of the jury, if these factors were outside of the realm of evidence, then there will also be a strong case for a retrial.
If there were any external factors (i.e. outside of the realm of evidence) that may have influenced the Jury’s final verdict, then there may also be a strong case for a retrial. Other consequences may be possible if influence was gained through intimidation or interference, these can be criminal activities relating to the Administration of Justice act.
Public Interest
High-profile crimes that are extremely serious in nature will be more likely to receive a retrial that a lower-profile crime of deemed lower severity.
If it is of high public interest that a verdict is found through proper procedure, then there is more likely to be a retrial, especially if the verdict resulted in a hung jury.
There may also be an argument for retrial under public interest if the defendant is required to remain in custody, which may be the case if the subject matter is of extremely serious nature.
The potential sentences will also be considered in the decision to grant a retrial.
Views and Interests of Victim(s), the Judge, the Police and Prosecuting Advocate
The views and interests of victims, Judges and the Police will be taken into account in the decision to grant a retrial.
The nature of every case will differ, but the Judge and the Police are likely to base their views on whether or not it is in the interests of justice that the case is retried.
The advocate representing the prosecution during the Trial will also be able to voice their opinion on the suitability of a retrial. As a representative of the Prosecution, their decision will be based on the likelihood of a conviction and the severity of the case.
What to do
Being involved in the retrial process can be a confusing period, and depending on the intricate details of your case, procedures for a retrial can vary wildly. Having specialist advice throughout the Court Trial procedure will help you best understand the implications of a retrial on your case.
You need to know where you stand, and the consequences of your case should it become subject to a retrial decision. With the removal of ‘double jeopardy’ laws, if you were previously acquitted of a crime and new evidence is presented, then you could be subject to another trial for the same case, Lawtons are here to help.