Ahead of Kim Johnson MP’s first reading of the Joint Enterprise (Significant Contribution) Bill in the Commons, Jon Robins reports that a new problem has emerged since the 2016 R v Jogee ruling, of juries being directed not to consider the contribution a person made to a crime. Felicity explains ‘Unfortunately, we now convict – and probably have done for quite a long time – people who make no significant contribution to a crime.’
The proposed legislation was drafted by legal experts for JENGbA, including Felicity.
‘Look, we need to put a foot on the break and distinguish between people who make a significant contributions to crime and those who do not. Otherwise what we do is risk convicting people who make no significant contribution to the crime. That’s the risk, unless you say to a jury: “Was he there? Did he do acts to demonstrate the intention to assist or encourage, and did those acts make a significant contribution to the crime?” Unless you tell the jury that, you’re risking convicting anybody, for example, on CCTV in a violent disorder – they might be a guilty violent disorder, but not necessarily guilty of murder.’
Felicity Gerry KC
You can read the article here
‘The more I speak with families and learn about joint enterprise the more outraged I become’: @KimJohnsonMP launches bill to tighten up controversial law which would ‘allow us to separate those who should be long-term prisoners from those who should not’ https://t.co/Ec7N5rznBB pic.twitter.com/DkJStuvw1o
— The Justice Gap (@JusticeGap) December 6, 2023