In R v Stow [2005] All ER (D) 132 (May), the Courts-Martial Appeal Court stated that a prosecutor had the ability to influence and even mislead a court. Therefore, [...]when assessing whether or not there had been proper compliance with the ECHR, art 6(1). In the instant case, the prosecutor at the defendant's court-martial was of junior rank and his performance as prosecuting authority could have impacted upon his promotion prospects. In the circumstances, the prosecuting authority did not comply with the necessary safeguards necessary for the ECHR, art 6(1).
Answer
his independence and impartiality were matters to be considered
Tags
#freedom-of-person #human-rights #public
Question
In R v Stow [2005] All ER (D) 132 (May), the Courts-Martial Appeal Court stated that a prosecutor had the ability to influence and even mislead a court. Therefore, [...]when assessing whether or not there had been proper compliance with the ECHR, art 6(1). In the instant case, the prosecutor at the defendant's court-martial was of junior rank and his performance as prosecuting authority could have impacted upon his promotion prospects. In the circumstances, the prosecuting authority did not comply with the necessary safeguards necessary for the ECHR, art 6(1).
Answer
?
Tags
#freedom-of-person #human-rights #public
Question
In R v Stow [2005] All ER (D) 132 (May), the Courts-Martial Appeal Court stated that a prosecutor had the ability to influence and even mislead a court. Therefore, [...]when assessing whether or not there had been proper compliance with the ECHR, art 6(1). In the instant case, the prosecutor at the defendant's court-martial was of junior rank and his performance as prosecuting authority could have impacted upon his promotion prospects. In the circumstances, the prosecuting authority did not comply with the necessary safeguards necessary for the ECHR, art 6(1).
Answer
his independence and impartiality were matters to be considered
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it In R v Stow [2005] All ER (D) 132 (May), the Courts-Martial Appeal Court stated that a prosecutor had the ability to influence and even mislead a court. Therefore, his independence and impartiality were matters to be considered when assessing whether or not there had been proper compliance with the ECHR, art 6(1). In the instant case, the prosecutor at the defendant's court-martial was of junior rank and his pe
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised on
scheduled repetition
scheduled repetition interval
last repetition or drill
Details
No repetitions
Discussion
Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.