skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 78741 Find in a Library
Title: Criminal Trial and the Disruptive Defendant, Part Two
Journal: Modern Law Review  Volume:43  Dated:(May 1980)  Pages:284-298
Author(s): G Zellick
Date Published: 1980
Page Count: 15
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United Kingdom
Annotation: The issue of proper representation for a disruptive defendant who has been removed from a British courtroom and also discharged or refused defense counsel is discussed.
Abstract: Exclusion of unruly defendants from their own trials should be courts' last resort after having already exhausted the available warnings and contempt charges. Under such circumstances, the defendant should be placed in a room with a loudspeaker that transmits trial proceedings. More elaborate transmission systems, such as closed-circuit television and two-way communication, should not be required. Readmittance to the trial should be granted only with the defendants' promises not to be disruptive. When removed defendants also discharge defense counsel or refuse to accept counsel, the court is in a dilemma about whether to force counsel on the defendants or proceed without defense counsels and thus risk the appearance that justice has not been properly transacted. Although there is no authoritative case law on this issue, the administration of justice would appear to be better served by empowering the court to assign counsel even against the defendants' will. Assigned counsels who have not benefited from the defendants' cooperation can still submit prosecution evidence to searching cross-examination, challenge evidence which may be inadmissible, and make a closing argument which presents the evidence in the most favorable perspective on behalf of defendants' discharged. A counsel who has had pretrial cooperation from the accused and has prepared the defense can simply proceed to present the defense as planned. A total of 85 footnotes are listed. For the second part of this article, see NCJ 78740.
Index Term(s): Attorney client relations; Court rules; Right to counsel; United Kingdom (UK)
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=78741

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.