Suing a Judge changing a charge and being “functus officio”

Can you really sue a judge if you’re wrongfully convicted? This episode unpacks the intriguing case of a man who attempted to do just that after his conviction was overturned. We dive into the legal constraints surrounding this scenario and examine Lord Denning’s view that judges should be able to make decisions without fear of personal liability. Join our analysis of the limits of a judge’s editing power on a court-ordered transcript and the accusations levelled against the judge at the second trial.

Switching gears, we explore intoxication’s role in criminal law and the complexities of specific and general intent offences. Through the lens of a case involving a man charged with breaking and entering, we discuss the implications of changing the charge after the accused has testified and the fairness of such an approach.

We also tackle the idea of a decision being ‘final’ and how it can be revisited, delving into a case involving immediate roadside driving prohibition.

Don’t miss this captivating exploration of justice, liability, and the intricacies of criminal law.

 

Legally Speaking with Michael Mulligan is live on CFAX 1070 every Thursday at 10:30 am. It’s also available on Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.