The true meaning of “wicked recklessness”: HM Advocate v Purcell

Article English OPEN
Chalmers, J. (2008)
  • References (21)
    21 references, page 1 of 3

    34 Double Jeopardy and Prosecution Appeals (Law Com No 267, 2001) leading to the Criminal Justice Act 2003, Part 10.

    35 Thirty-Sixth Annual Report 2001: A Year of Achievement (Law Com No 275, 2002) Part V.

    36 Professor Maher is scheduled to leave the Commission in August 2008 and at the time of writing there has been no advertisement for his replacement.

    12 As in Brian Venuti, High Court at Glasgow, September 2004 (convictions for murder and attempted murder by driving into a group of persons). See also Kelly v HM Advocate 2006 SCCR 9 (attempted murder).

    13 Road Traffic Act 1988 s 1, as amended.

    14 Government of the United States of America v Jennings [1983] 1 AC 624, at 629 per Lord Roskill, discussing s 8 of the Road Traffic Act 1956.

    15 Government of the United States of America v Jennings at 644 per Lord Roskill.

    16 G H Gordon, The Criminal Law of Scotland, 3rd edn, by M G A Christie, vol 2 (2001) para 26.09 n 44. The maximum penalty for the offence created in 1956 was five years' imprisonment: Road Traffic Act 1956 s 8(1).

    17 See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/05_10_07_purcell.pdf.

    18 As to whether the court could have raised the issue of relevancy ex proprio motu, see Cartwright v HM Advocate 2001 SLT 1163; Heywood v McLennan 1994 SCCR 1.

  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark