Num recente e notável julgamento por homicídio em que Gillian Frost (Departamento de Advocacia) foi encarregada de representar um dos arguidos, julgamento esse que resultou numa absolvição, um dos aspectos mais inovadores do caso foi a utilização de um intermediário para assistir o seu cliente.
The defendant in question had significant learning difficulties and was in grave risk of being left at an unfair disadvantage without specialised apoio to help him understand and follow the proceedings. Application was made for this support and granted. In the following article Gillian explains the legal background to this developing area.
A lei
Section 16(1) of the Youth Justice and Criminal Provas Act 1999 (the Act) made provision for the use of special measures in the case of vulnerable and intimidated witnesses to facilitate the giving of their evidence.
A secção 29 da referida lei permite a inquirição de uma testemunha através de um intermediário como uma das medidas especiais permitidas.
A utilização de medidas especiais para os arguidos foi expressamente excluída pelo artigo 16(1) da Lei. No entanto, uma alteração acrescentada pelo artigo 104 da Lei dos Médicos Legistas e da Justiça de 2009 alterou a Lei, inserindo o artigo 33BA. Parte da s.104 é reproduzida abaixo:
Secção 33BA Exame do arguido através de um intermediário
(1) A presente secção aplica-se a qualquer processo (quer num tribunal de magistrados quer no Tribunal da Coroa) contra uma pessoa por uma infração.
(2) O Tribunal pode, a pedido do arguido, dar uma instrução nos termos da subsecção (3) se considerar que -
(a) that the condition is subsection (5) is or, as the case may be, the conditions in subsection (6) are met in relation to the accused, and
(b) que a direção é necessária para garantir ao arguido um processo equitativo.
(3) Uma instrução nos termos da presente subsecção é uma instrução que prevê que qualquer interrogatório do arguido seja realizado através de um intérprete ou de outra pessoa aprovada pelo tribunal para efeitos da presente secção (“um intermediário”).
(4) A função de um intermediário é comunicar -
(a) Ao arguido, perguntas feitas ao arguido, e
(b) Às pessoas que façam essas perguntas, as respostas dadas pelo arguido em resposta às mesmas,
e explicar as perguntas ou respostas na medida do necessário para permitir a sua compreensão pelo arguido ou pela pessoa em causa.
(5) Se o arguido tiver menos de 18 anos no momento da apresentação do pedido, a condição é que a sua capacidade de participar efetivamente no processo como testemunha que presta depoimento oral em tribunal seja comprometida pelo seu nível de capacidade intelectual ou de funcionamento social.
(6) Se o arguido tiver atingido a idade de 18 anos no momento da apresentação do pedido, as condições são as seguintes
(a) o arguido sofre de uma perturbação mental (na aceção do Mental Health Act 1983) ou tem uma deficiência significativa da inteligência e da função social, e
(b) O arguido estiver, por esse motivo, impossibilitado de participar efetivamente no processo como testemunha que presta depoimento oral em tribunal.
(7) Qualquer interrogatório do arguido em cumprimento de uma instrução nos termos do n.º 3 deve realizar-se na presença das pessoas que as normas de processo penal ou a instrução prevejam e em circunstâncias em que
(a) O juiz ou juízes (ou ambos) e os representantes legais que actuam no processo possam ver e ouvir o interrogatório do arguido e comunicar com o intermediário, e
(b) O júri (se existir) possa ver e ouvir o interrogatório do arguido, e
(c) Se houver dois ou mais arguidos no processo, cada um dos outros arguidos possa ver e ouvir o interrogatório do arguido.
Para efeitos da presente subsecção, não se deve ter em conta qualquer deficiência visual ou auditiva.”
Infelizmente, esta alteração ainda não entrou em vigor e, segundo se sabe, ainda não foi fixada uma data de aplicação para o artigo 104º, uma vez que ainda é necessário um volume considerável de trabalho preparatório.
Nonetheless, an application can succeed on the basis of the case of C v Sevenoaks Youth Court – EWHC 3088 (3/11/09), where an application was granted on behalf of a juvenile Defendant on a charge of assault. The case was heard in the High Court on an application for permission to apply for judicial review. Paragraph 16 of the judgment of Openshaw J reads:
“I have already made clear that there is no statutory power permitting the appointment of an intermediary for a Defendant, but there may be some procedural power in the Criminal Procedure Rules. Criminal Procedure r 1.11 sets out the overriding objective to deal with criminal cases justly, which includes at (c) recognising the rights of a Defendant, particularly under art 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Furthermore, the court’s case management powers at r 3.10(b)(v) require the court to consider what arrangements are necessary to facilitate the participation of any person in the trial, including the Defendant. In an appropriate case this surely requires the appointment of an intermediary for the Defendant himself.”
O nosso caso
Representámos um arguido no que acreditamos ter sido a primeira utilização prática de um arguido intermediário num julgamento importante. Tratava-se de um julgamento por homicídio perante um juiz do Tribunal Superior. O caso envolvia também rapto, falso aprisionamento e perversão do curso da justiça.
This was a six handed case. The fifth Defendant was our client who had limited abilities which we vontade detail below (but included an IQ of 63). The intermediary sat in the Dock alongside the Defendant throughout the evidence relevant to him and went with him to the witness box when he testified.
O julgamento foi complicado devido à natureza “cortante” das defesas e foi levantada uma questão pelos co-réus relativamente à necessidade de um intermediário.
As etapas práticas
(1) AVALIAÇÃO INICIAL PELA DEFESA
No nosso caso, o arguido, um homem de 36 anos, não tinha sido representado durante as suas duas primeiras entrevistas e não lhe tinha sido fornecido um intermediário (o FME (médico da polícia) concordou em testemunhar que teria recomendado um se soubesse do QI muito baixo do arguido).
When we read the answers given by the defendant in those police interviews we appreciated that the defendant was likely to struggle to give evidence on his own behalf at trial. He spoke of having a very bad memory during the interview. When we met him he presented as vulnerable and slow.
Aconselhámos a obtenção de um relatório psiquiátrico e de um relatório do psicólogo escolar.
(2) OS RELATÓRIOS
The reports we obtained showed that the Defendant would be able to stand trial but that he did not have the capacity to properly give evidence in normal court working procedure conditions. He would need regular breaks and he would need to be given information in extremely small packages. His concentration would be limited and breaks would be required to check that he understood the proceedings.
Neste caso, os relatórios recomendavam especificamente a assistência de um intermediário. Os relatórios foram notificados à Coroa.
(3) O PEDIDO
The application for an intermediary has to be made expeditiously because if granted an appropriate intermediary has to be located and funding obtained. In our case the Prosecution also obtained two medical reports. (At trial we called the Prosecution psychologist as a defence witness as she had been able to do more extensive testing of the Defendant). It was agreed that the Defendant had low level of verbal comprehension, low IQ and very poor short term memory.
A Acusação não se opôs ao uso de um intermediário pelo Arguido. No entanto, tivemos de notificar os relatórios aos co-arguidos, para que os seus advogados pudessem levantar as suas preocupações.
Em princípio, o douto juiz do julgamento concordou que um intermediário deveria ser utilizado se e quando o arguido prestasse depoimento e para o assistir de uma forma mais geral durante o depoimento de outros.
(4) ETAPAS APÓS O DEFERIMENTO DO PEDIDO
The Register of Approved Intermediaries is maintained by a Department of the Ministry of Justice. They assist in helping to find an appropriate intermediary. A period of liaison between the intermediary and “client” is recommended so that they can establish a relationship. This may not always be a long period but ideally should be established by one or two interviews before trial and after the Intermediary has been provided with at least a Resumo of the case and any interview Exhibits. The intermediary will normally be required to furnish an assessment of his own, written or oral, depending on the circumstances and time available.
O financiamento do intermediário para os arguidos é efectuado através de um pedido de autorização prévia à comissão de serviço jurídico. Devem ser apresentadas as tarifas dos intermediários. A autorização é para a avaliação antes do julgamento e para a participação no julgamento. Jason Connolly, responsável pela política do Ministério da Justiça, ajudou-nos a fornecer informações como os Códigos de Prática e Ética dos Intermediários Registados e as suas taxas de remuneração.
(4) QUESTÕES DE JULGAMENTO
Havia 4 questões a tratar:
(1) Era necessário estabelecer as “regras básicas” para que o intermediário pudesse desempenhar a sua tarefa com um mínimo de perturbação do desenrolar do processo. O nosso intermediário fez algumas observações ao tribunal (na ausência do júri) sobre a forma como encarava o seu papel. O intermediário aconselhou o advogado a evitar duplas negativas e cláusulas múltiplas e a procurar fazer perguntas curtas. O intermediário discutiu o procedimento a ser adotado para indicar ao Juiz que o Réu precisava de um intervalo.
(2) Que indicações (ou orientações) devem ser dadas ao júri relativamente à função do “funcionário” visto no banco dos réus com o arguido.
The learned trial Judge made some introductory remarks when the jury were first made aware of the intermediary’s presence. Later on in the trial the trial Judge circulated to counsel a proposed statement to be given to the jury in relation to the intermediary assisting the defendant in the witness box. This set out the psychologist’s findings and recommendation for an intermediary. The jury were also told that not all parties accepted that evidence but the Judge had allowed the intermediary on the basis that he had to ensure a fair trial. The jury were told that the Barristers had been advised as to how they should ask questions (eg avoiding double negatives). The jury were told the intermediary would indicate if he considered the defendant did not understand a question. The jury were told that they would have to decide relevant matters themselves, regardless of the Judge’s decision that an intermediary should be allowed and regardless of the presence of the intermediary in court.
(3) At what stage to deal with the Issue of the need for an Intermediary. Each case will vary depending on for example: number of defendants; whether the defendant is to give evidence or just have assistance in the dock during the prosecution evidence; whether there is agreement or not as to the necessity for the intermediary. In our case the need for an intermediary was raised pre-trial but the substantive argument developed during the course of the trial. The Judge, in order to ensure a fair trial for our defendant, allowed the intermediary to be in the dock. That helped counsel as the intermediary could note on what occasions the defendant had difficulty understanding and we could assist him later in conference about those parts of the evidence. Before the defendant gave evidence (but after defendants 1 to 4 had given evidence) the role of the intermediary was canvassed further with counsel and the Judge ruled on how he would direct the jury. Interestingly our defence experts were interposed during the course of the defendant’s evidence but the learned Judge had made a statement to the jury before he gave his evidence. The intermediary was able to clarify the meaning of words or to reassure the defendant about issues as they arose. A brief reference was made to the jury as to the presence of the intermediary in the dock. In our case the intermediary was not present for the jury selection, opening speech and initial witnesses that did not affect our defendant.
(4) What further instruction (if any) was needed in the summing up? The learned trial Judge directed the jury that the defendant had been allowed the assistance of an intermediary in case there was any difficulty in him understanding the questions asked and the case put against him by the prosecution or other defendants. The jury were told that the extent of any impairment of his understanding was a assunto of dispute and that it was a matter for them whether he had real difficulties. The intermediary was allowed in case there were difficulties.
Conclusão
The choice of whether or not to call a defendant to give evidence is sometimes a difficult one to make. In some cases it may be that medical evidence for a vulnerable person would be sufficient to avoid any adverse inference from not giving evidence. However, there may be times when counsel’s experience is such that they believe that the calling of a defendant is essential. The use of an intermediary is a course of action which can help that vulnerable defendant to feel more relaxed because he knows there is someone who can intervene if he has difficulty understanding a question. The intermediary assists counsel because in a case of a poor memory the defendant will forget what he needs to tell counsel by the time of the next break in the case. He can indicate to the intermediary immediately who can make a note of the point and inform counsel. Special measures for witnesses have been available for some time (prosecution and defence witnesses) and now there is the availability of at least this special measure for vulnerable defendants. As mentioned above, the statutory framework is not yet implemented. There is much to be done, partly to ensure there will be sufficient registered intermediaries available. Hopefully all those defendants that require an intermediary will be able to have one. It will be important to be aware of the possibility as soon as practicable. Trying to match a registered intermediary that is local to the relevant court will be important in keeping down costs. The longer the time it takes to obtain the funding for an intermediary the harder it may be to find an appropriate intermediary who is sufficiently local.
GILLIAN FROST (Barrister, Ronald Fletcher Baker LLP)
Um artigo semelhante, escrito por Gillian Frost, foi publicado na revista Criminal Bar Quarterly.
(Please note: This article was originally published on our previous website and is provided for general information purposes only. While it reflects the legal position at the time of writing, the law may have changed since publication. For up-to-date advice tailored to your circumstances, please contact our team.)
