Judge slams police over evidence of poor practice
A JUDGE has criticised Guernsey Police for its poor practice, after allowing two witnesses to collaborate over their evidence.
Judge Graeme McKerrell issued the rebuke in his summing up at the end of a Magistrate’s Court trial, where it had come to light that the two alleged victims, Abbie and Jamie Hort, had been allowed to give their statements together.
‘The method in this case, if correct ... would consist of poor practice in my view and a lesson should be learnt for the future,’ he said.
Guernsey Police has said they would be looking for ‘learning opportunities’ following this case.
Mr and Mrs Hort, who made headlines for winning £50,000 in the 2014 Channel Islands Christmas lottery and eight months later applying for benefits, gave evidence in the trial of 34-year-old Justin Batiste, who was accused of causing grievous bodily harm to Mrs Hort and of twice assaulting Mr Hort. He was found not guilty of all counts.
But during the couple’s evidence it became clear they had given their statements to the police together, while Mrs Hort was being treated in hospital.
The issue came to light during the cross-examination of Mrs Hort, when she was asked how she knew what was in her husband’s statement.
She said it was due to her being there when he wrote it and she heard everything he said.
Mr Hort described how the statements were a ‘group effort’, with Mr Hort saying part, followed by Mrs Hort.
Superintendent Phil Breban said statements should be obtained from key witnesses at the earliest opportunity to ensure the evidential integrity and content of the statement.
‘However, consideration is always given to the individual circumstances, the vulnerability of witnesses, their emotional state and the particular incident itself,’ he said.
‘Generally, a statement from one witness should not be taken in the presence of another. That has not been followed in this case and, while important to acknowledge that the circumstances of some cases can make it difficult, we will of course review actions taken to identify learning opportunities, which will then be shared amongst all staff.’
Defence advocate Samuel Steel said he was concerned there had been collusion between the witnesses.
Judge McKerrell said he shared those concerns, particularly as it involved civilian witnesses. ‘They should not, in my view, be asked to sit down together and be invited to make statements in front of each other at the same time,’ he said.
While Mr Batiste was cleared of all charges, it was not due to collusion by the Horts. The judge noted instead that there was significant discrepancies in their court evidence, despite the statements being given together, which was one of the reasons for the verdict.
Case report in full Page 2
