Director of Public Prosecutions v Henderson – WLR Daily

Posted March 15th, 2016 in crime, harassment, law reports, racism by sally

Director of Public Prosecutions v Henderson [2016] EWHC 464 (Admin)

‘The defendant was charged with three offences of racially aggravated harassment, contrary to section 31(1)(b) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and, in the alternative, three offences of harassment, contrary to section 4A of the Public Order Act 1986. Both sets of offences were alleged to have been committed against the same victims and arose out of the same set of facts. Following the trial, the defendant was convicted of the three racially aggravated offences but, having heard submissions from the defendant’s representative, the district judge declined to announce a verdict on the section 4A offences (“the underlying offences”) and adjourned the case. The matter came before a different district judge who concluded that the facts of the underlying offences had been proved before the district judge at trial with the result that guilty verdicts should be returned in relation to the three underlying offences, with no separate penalty being imposed. In so doing, the district judge rejected the defendant’s submission that the correct course of action, the aggravated offences having been proved, was to adjourn the underlying offences sine die pursuant to the power in section 10 of the Magistrates’ Court Act 1980. The defendant challenged his conviction on the underlying offences by way of an appeal by case stated.’

WLR Daily, 9th March 2016