The Power of a Defence Statement in securing acquittals in Criminal Proceedings

By Narita Bahra KC & Rhys Rosser

A defence statement can be the most critical document in securing an acquittal, in a UK criminal trial.

Under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (CPIA), the accused is required (Crown Court) and/or may (Magistrates Court) serve a Defence Statement if they plead not guilty. In the absence of complying with this legal obligation, neither the accused nor their respective legal team are entitled to ensuing disclosure.

Purpose of a Defence Statement

The purpose of a Defence Statement is to clarify the accused’s case, to ensure the Prosecution, the Court and if necessary, co-defendants are on notice as to:

• The nature of the defence

• The disputed facts; and

• Any points of law being relied upon (e.g. admissibility of evidence)

Prosecution’s Disclosure Obligations

Upon the Defence Statement being served, the prosecution must comply with further disclosure obligations which includes pursuing further lines of enquiry emanating from the contents of the document and disclosing any material which assist the defence or undermines their case.

Judicial Approach and Trial Management

The Courts encourage service of compliant Defence Statements, as they assist in focusing the court’s attention on trial issues and management. The contents of respective Defence Statements can take on key significance as the trial commences and the key issues arise, especially in multi-handed cases.

Ownership and Accuracy

Although a Defence Statement is a legal document drafted by the defence team, it is deemed the accused’s document. It is, therefore, imperative to discuss strategy as to the contents, ensure the contents are accurate and verified with care, before it is finalised by the individual standing trial.

Risks of Inaccuracy and Adverse Inferences

It is, therefore, essential that the contents of your defence statement, in relation to your specified defence issues, is accurate. If the case proceeds to trial the prosecution can be permitted to deploy the contents of the accused’s defence statement to damage credibility, via cross examination on the inconsistencies in this document and/or a material change in the defence position, post service of the defence statement and at trial. It is then open to the Court to direct the tribunal of fact, that in due course they may question veracity of the accused and draw adverse inferences from the change in position.

Prosecution Challenges and Adequacy

It is ever increasing the position, that the prosecution seek to assert that served defence statements are deficient, requesting further detail. A failure to provide what is deemed an adequate defence statement or to update the document, as required, can result in an adverse inference/s and/or case management difficulties.

Case Study: Garrick Law – Strangulation Allegations

In a recent Garrick Law case, the strategically detailed contents of the defence statement resulted in wide reaching disclosure consequences, for a client facing serious allegations of strangulation.

In this case the contents of the Defence Statement paid particular focus upon:

• the particularised nature of the accused’s defence;

• the matters of fact on which the defence took issue with the prosecution; and

• Digital Disclosure and omitted investigation which became a pre-requisite based on the client’ account.

Service of the detailed Defence Statement engaged the secondary disclosure provisions. The Prosecution wee obliged to review their case considering the defence advanced and properly raised disclosure issues.

The further evidence uncovered in the ensuing investigation supported the client’s defence leading the Prosecution to concede that there was no longer a realistic prospect of conviction.

A Not Guilty verdict followed the prosecution offering no evidence.

The Garrick Law Crime Team – Priya Wader & Glenda Hair – instructed Rhys Rosser at 2 Bedford Row.