Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hanham (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 22 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Road Safety Bill [HL].


Road Safety Bill [HL]

My Lords, can the Minister clarify this matter? If someone is prosecuted for manslaughter while driving a mechanically-propelled vehicle, and they are tried and found not guilty, is the prosecutor able to say that that not guilty verdict means that they must put before the court the possibility that the defendant is guilty of any one of the other three offences? If that happens, does the prosecutor have to allow time for the defence to take second instructions? Does he have to allow time for an adjournment? Does the defendant have to go through a retrial on the back of much of the previous evidence? That may happen in other court proceedings, but I am not aware of it. Normally, if you are found not guilty at the end of a trial, that is that and you are not allowed to be prosecuted again for that offence. If you are then prosecuted for another offence, do the proceedings have to start all over again, with the person being re-arrested and the matter put before the court? Before we agree to the amendment, we need an explanation to clarify the matter.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c1603 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Death Dangerous driving Driving Disqualification Homicide Drugs Exemptions First aid Motor vehicles Police Powers Mobile phones Safety Roads Testing Road traffic offences Motor insurance
Legislation
Road Safety Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk