A briefing from Corker Bining on 1st November says that it is a well-established principle of criminal law that compelled testimony (such as that which may be obtained under its powers by the SFO) can only be admitted in evidence against the compelled person is extremely limited circumstances. However, it asks, is it easier to admit compelled testimony against – or on behalf of – a co-defendant tried on the same indictment as the compelled person? The article offers 2 scenarios and says, in conclusion, that the privilege against self-incrimination has never been regarded by the courts as absolute, and that the use immunity granted as a quid pro quo for the compulsion of the interview applies only to the subsequent use of such interview by a prosecutor, not a co-defendant. Therefore, compelled testimony can, in carefully prescribed circumstances, return to damage the compelled person at trial.
This blog is primarily for my own use, to keep informed and up to date. However, if you would like to say thank you (and perhaps help me get a new, better laptop when I am away…) you can “buy me a coffee” at https://www.buymeacoffee.com/KoIvM842y
raytodd.blog 