EWCA Crim 1980
Properly analysed, the decision in R. v Wilmot (Alan) (1989) 89 Cr. App. R. 341 had not decided that there was no question of privilege or waiver when a defendant gave evidence that he told his solicitor the account which he later produced at trial which was contrary to an earlier statement. Whatever the correct analysis of R v Wilmot, where a defendant had clearly waived any such privilege, the Crown's comment to the jury during the course of his trial on his failure to call his solicitor as a witness, despite her availability, was not impermissible and his conviction for murder remained safe.
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ, Maddison J, Rafferty J)