Defence statements in the magistrates' court: voluntary but not risk-free (CPIA 1996 ss.6 and 11)
Natalia Wiśniewska pleads not guilty in a magistrates' court in England to a charge of common assault, a summary offence, and her trial is fixed. The prosecution has complied with its initial duty of disclosure. Natalia asks her solicitor whether she has to give a defence statement.
What is the best advice to Natalia?
Choose one answer to see the reasoning.
Worked answer
Correct answer D: She need not give one, but if she does and then puts forward a different defence at trial, the court may comment and draw proper inferences.
THE RULE TO REMEMBER
In summary trials a defence statement is voluntary, but if one is given, late service, inconsistency or departure from it at trial may attract comment and adverse inferences.
Defence statements in the magistrates' court: voluntary but not risk-free (CPIA 1996 ss.6 and 11)
The Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 makes a defence statement compulsory only in cases to be tried in the Crown Court (s.5). For a summary trial, s.6 applies: where the prosecutor has complied with the initial duty of disclosure, the accused 'may' give a defence statement, and if she does she must give it within the relevant period. Natalia is therefore not obliged to serve one. However, s.11(3) applies where the accused in a s.6 case does give an initial defence statement and then, for example, gives it late, sets out inconsistent defences, or at trial puts forward a defence not mentioned or different from that in the statement. In that event, s.11(5) allows the court or any other party to make appropriate comment and the court to draw proper inferences. Serving a statement may still help, for example to support an application for further disclosure.
Why A is wrong: That describes the compulsory Crown Court regime under s.5; in a summary trial the statement is voluntary under s.6.
Why B is wrong: There is no alibi-only obligation; alibi details matter only if a defence statement is given.
Why C is wrong: Section 11(3) applies faults in a voluntary s.6 statement, so comment and inferences can arise.
Why E is wrong: The prosecutor's continuing duty of review applies whether or not a defence statement is given.
A little more practice done.
Related questions
The prosecution's initial duty of disclosure of unused material (CPIA 1996 s.3)
What must the prosecutor do with the passer-by's statement?
Conditions for pre-action disclosure (CPR 31.16)
Which of the following must the court be satisfied of before it can order pre-action disclosure?
Litigation privilege: contemplated litigation and dominant purpose (SFO v ENRC; Three Rivers (No 6))
Which of the following best describes whether the reports are protected by litigation privilege?
A GOOD HABIT, DELIVERED
Tomorrow's question.
In your inbox.
One free question a day, with the answer and reasoning.
No course pitches. Just your daily practice.