Escaping Conviction: A Second Chance Romantic Suspense (Conviction Series Book One)

Product Information

His sister is missing and he's being charged with her kidnapping. He thinks we can mend what he broke. But I can't trust him. She’s in college and still healing, so he’s kept his distance. That resolve vanishes when her brother asks Devil to train her in self-defense. His head tells him to stay away, but no one can protect her better than he can.

Examples of the type of conduct which may constitute the offence of obstructing a police officer include:Greer adores strong, sassy heroines and steamy second chances. She hopes to give readers an escape from the craziness of life and a safe place to feel too much. She’d LOVE to hear from you anytime! Except the morning. She ha Greer Rivers is a former crime fighter in a suit, but now happily leaves that to her characters! A born and raised Carolinian, Greer says “y’all”, the occasional “bless your heart” (when necessary), and feels comfortable using legal jargon in everyday life. damaging or threatening to damage the property of a potential witness in such a way that the witness will know or believe that it is linked to him assisting an investigation or giving evidence;

If the defendant was convicted and there is clear evidence of collusion between the witness and defendant to give perjured evidence, a prosecution may be appropriate. Where it is in the public interest to prosecute for perjury others involved in fabricating false evidence with the defendant, then the defendant should also be prosecuted, except in exceptional circumstances; There are statutory offences which involve wasting police time and which should be used instead of s.5(2) when there is sufficient evidence. For example:Any disposal of a corpse with intent to obstruct or prevent a coroner's inquest, when there is a duty to hold one, is an offence. The offence is a common law offence, triable only on indictment and carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment and/or a fine. These offences may overlap with other criminal offences, such as forgery or deception. The more flagrant the breach of the appropriate section of this Act, the more likely it will be that the defendant should be prosecuted for an offence under the Act as well as any other offences that arise. the acts strike at the proceedings in a fundamental way. (For example, by giving a false name so as to avoid a mandatory disqualification or a 'totting' disqualification: giving false details which might significantly influence the sentence passed; giving details which may result in a caution instead of prosecution); Note, there must be an investigation underway at the time of the alleged act. It is insufficient that the doer of the act believes this to be the case R v Singh (B) and Others (1999) CLR, Aug, 681-682. In a case in which the Defendant believed (wrongly) that there was an investigation underway, it may be appropriate to charge him with attempting the s.51(1) offence Whether or not the intention to cause the course of justice to be obstructed, perverted or interfered with is the predominant intention of the person doing the act.

a partner who falsely claims that he/she was driving at the time of the accident but relents before the breathalyser procedure is undertaken; Policemen shone torches on the man - who was said to be “running like a cat along the rooftops” - and he was recaptured. Six prisoners (1982)

Delays mean witnesses ‘disengage or disappear’

does not remove the need for each case to be considered on its individual merits or fetter the discretion to charge and to prosecute the most appropriate offence depending on the particular facts of the case. Where police wish to interview jurors an application via the Crown Court to the Court of Appeal should be made by the CPS having first notified the AGO . However, the courts do face difficulties relying on this factor of justification. One of the main concern is that the way which the courts classify offences does not include a moral evaluation as illustrated in Davies v Health and Safety Executive [78]. Also, the courts may encounter an error in classification as a mere regulatory offence to one, may be of great social and emotional importance to others [79]. For example, environmental pollution being charged for a punishment of a fine. What is more problematic is that not all regulatory offences carry trivial penalties and some do carry possible custodial sentence [80]. R v Chargot [81] is a case which is similar to Davis where the courts applied the same reasoning, ruling that the offence was regulatory even though the penalties have since been repealed under the Health and Safety (Offences) Act 2008 [82] to carry a penalty of maximum two years imprisonment and an unlimited fine upon conviction. This shows that the classification of offences is not always applicable to justify the compatibility of a reverse onus with art.6(2) [83]. According to case law, it is submitted that this factor is determined on a case by case basis and the classification of offences becomes more discretionary as a result. The courts when considering this factor should take into account not only the seriousness of the offence but also other implications and moral injustice when deciding on a reversal.