Difference between revisions of "Zimbabwe Criminal Defense Manual - Defense Lawyer's Role and Responsibilities"
From Criminal Defense Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to searchDdemetriou (talk | contribs) |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
In Banda HB-34-02 the legal practitioner placed himself in a position where he had a conflict of interests. The accused, a police officer, was charged with corruption. It was alleged that he had taken a bribe from three foreigners whom he had arrested on suspicion of car theft. A legal practitioner had interviewed the foreigners, and thereafter interviewed the accused. The same legal practitioner was called as a State witness during the accused's trial, at which he accused was represented by another member of the practitioner's firm. It was held that the practitioner's testimony was as a result of the privileged position he enjoyed from consulting the three foreigners and interviewing the accused. He should have decided who to represent. Representing the three foreigners and the accused was improper. The conflict of interest in this matter culminating in the practitioner giving evidence against the accused amounted to an irregularity actually resulting in a substantial miscarriage of justice. The proceedings should be set aside. | In Banda HB-34-02 the legal practitioner placed himself in a position where he had a conflict of interests. The accused, a police officer, was charged with corruption. It was alleged that he had taken a bribe from three foreigners whom he had arrested on suspicion of car theft. A legal practitioner had interviewed the foreigners, and thereafter interviewed the accused. The same legal practitioner was called as a State witness during the accused's trial, at which he accused was represented by another member of the practitioner's firm. It was held that the practitioner's testimony was as a result of the privileged position he enjoyed from consulting the three foreigners and interviewing the accused. He should have decided who to represent. Representing the three foreigners and the accused was improper. The conflict of interest in this matter culminating in the practitioner giving evidence against the accused amounted to an irregularity actually resulting in a substantial miscarriage of justice. The proceedings should be set aside. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | See [[Zimbabwe | Zimbabwe Criminal Defense Manual]] | ||
