[2004] EWCA Crim 2100

Where appellants had received advice from their solicitors not to answer questions, it was the genuineness of the decision that was relevant, not its quality. A jury had to consider whether an accused had remained silent, not because of the advice but because he had no, or no satisfactory, explanation to give.

CA (Crim Div) (Latham LJ, Sir Charles Mantell)

30/07/2004