Citation Central Criminal Court 2 May 2014
sentencing perverting
course of justice
R v Constance Briscoe
Summary
Sentencing remarks
1.Constance Briscoe,
you are the third individual to have been convicted of criminal offences
arising out of a saga whose origin goes back to 2003, when both Chris Huhne and
Vicky Pryce lied about who had driven a speeding motor vehicle, and extends to
you in 2011, when you sought to hide your true motive and role in the exposure
of that story. You then compounded your position by deliberately fabricating
evidence when you thought that you might be exposed. If there is a common
thread between you all, then, from the insights I have had into the character
of the each of you during this case, I regret that it is one of arrogance by
educated individuals who considered that respect for the law was for others.
2.I am only too
conscious that your convictions mark a personal tragedy for both you and your
children. You are an individual who unsurprisingly has been something of a role
model to others. Although blessed with intelligence, you did not have every
advantage in life. However you worked hard at school and were the first person
in your family to go to university. Having gained a degree in law, you joined
the Bar and over the years established a successful criminal practice, and had
the privilege of being appointed a Crown Court Recorder. You have done all of this
whilst raising your two much loved children.
3.However, over the
years you have also courted a significant degree of self publicity, and
therefore built up a familiarity with the workings of the media. I have no
doubt that it was this familiarity which led you to offer to assist Vicky Pryce
to disseminate her story about taking Chris Huhne’s penalty points. It is clear
from the email and phone evidence, that you were intimately involved in the
negotiations between Vicky Pryce and the press, both in relation to her
requirement for a confidentiality clause and, for the corroboration and
dissemination of her story that she had been subjected to pressure; motivated,
as was Vicky Pryce, by a joint desire to ensure the downfall of Chris Huhne. In
contrast to the true position, when you came to provide your two witness
statements to the police, you painted a wholly misleading picture of
impartiality and lack of involvement with the press, in order to enhance your
credibility as a witness in the criminal proceedings involving them.
4.Subsequently, when
your true attitude and role was exposed by the disclosure of the emails from
the Mail on Sunday, you sought to cover your tracks by manufacturing a false
witness statement, which admitted to a limited amount of contact with that
newspaper. Unfortunately the matter did not stop there, because after this
deception had been uncovered, and you had been charged with the offences at
counts 1 and 2 on the indictment, you proceeded to manufacture a second false
statement, which you provided to a defence expert in order to obtain an
innocent explanation for the existence of the first one. It was only after that
expert opinion had been served on the Crown Prosecution Service, and they had
in turn obtained their own expert evidence, that this further deception was
exposed.
5.I am sure that you
realise only too well that such conduct strikes at the heart of our much
cherished system of criminal justice, which is integral and invaluable to the
good order of society. In those circumstances I regret that I do not consider
that any other sentence can be justified, but one involving the deprivation of
your liberty. I of course take into account, amongst other matters, your good
character, and the devastating effect that these convictions will have upon
your career at the Bar. However, your conduct not only involved deliberately
seeking to paint a false picture of your role and attitude for the purposes of
enhancing your credibility in the Chris Huhne and Vicky Pryce prosecution, but
was compounded by the deliberate manufacturing of evidence so as to avoid your
own detection. The last of these deceptions taking place during the period
leading towards your own trial. In those circumstances, and having regard to
the principle of totality, I consider that the least sentence which can
properly be passed upon you is one of 16 months imprisonment. That total will
be reached by consecutive sentences of 4, 5 and 7 months custody respectively,
upon counts 1, 2 and 3. You know that you will be released half way through
that term, but will remain on licence for the full term and liable to recall if
you were to commit any further offence or otherwise breach the conditions of
your licence.
