Double Jeopardy - The Law and Politics Podcast

It’s been quite a year for law and politics in the UK. From the unravelling scandal of wrongful convictions in the Post Office Horizon cases, to the chilling aftermath of the Lucy Letby trial, questions about accountability and reform have never been more pressing, as  growing scrutiny, and ever more polarised politics, continue to threaten the delicate balance between legal principles and public confidence.    And through it all, Double Jeopardy has been bringing expert comment and the sharpest analysis wherever law and politics collide.   In this final episode of the year, Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen are joined by renowned legal commentator Joshua Rozenberg to look back on 2024. What were its defining legal and political moments ? Where is police accountability after the Chris Kaba shooting? Have we heard the last of Lucy Letby, and why is the government not doing more to rescue a crumbling justice system? Together, they examine the structural and cultural challenges facing the courts and legal institutions, exploring how these events are shaping public trust- and perhaps damaging it to the point of no repair.   This is not just a retrospective; it’s a critical interrogation of justice today. With sharp insights and deep analysis, this episode unpacks the interplay of law, politics, and public sentiment in shaping the UK's legal landscape.

The announcement that the Ministry of Justice has commissioned the Law Commission to undertake a comprehensive review of homicide law and sentencing in murder cases alongside the Gauke review of sentencing in non-homicide cases means that sentencing policy in England and Wales will be reviewed simultaneously by two separate bodies. Given the role of longer sentences for murder in increasing sentences across the board, is this  a sensible way to tackle the sentence inflation generated over the past twenty years which is the principal cause of the current prisons crisis? And with the wealth of existing data, including a magisterial 2006 Report by the Law Commission into homicide law, why does the Government need more reports other than to buy time? Beyond attacking Conservative governments for not building more prisons to accommodate yet more prisoners, what original ideas does the Justice Secretary actually have about how to reform the crumbling justice system? In the latest episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken and Tim take us into the history and evolution of homicide sentencing, from the disastrous 2003 Criminal Justice Act conceived by New Labour to the present calls for change, exploring how these reforms intersect with broader legal principles and questioning whether the current system strikes the right balance between deterrence, punishment, and fairness. Ken and Tim also examine the judiciary’s delicate role in managing sentence inflation and resisting political interference, all while advocating for a more logical and cohesive approach to homicide law.

As the House of Commons casts an historic vote on assisted dying, the debate over this deeply contentious issue isn’t going away. If anything, the vote has ignited even stronger passions on both sides, particularly about the judiciary’s role in navigating such morally charged territory, making decisions over life and death.   In the latest episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen dissect this dilemma, the impact of religious beliefs on the legislative process, and the delicate balance judges must maintain when dealing with life-and-death decisions.   The discussion then widens to include the resignation of Louise Haigh over a very old offence, a development that raises real questions about whether her treatment is consistent with the government’s stated policies on rehabilitation, or whether her sacking was purely political. Against this backdrop, Ken and Tim reflect on the wider challenges facing the judicial system, including the persistent backlog of cases that threatens the integrity of justice in the UK.

Why is the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill being introduced as a Private Member’s Bill, and how does this approach compare to historical conscience-driven legislation like the Abortion Act or the abolition of capital punishment?   In this episode of Double Jeopardy, hosts Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen delve into the complex issues surrounding assisted dying, with a focus on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill due for Second Reading in Parliament on 29th November. They examine its historical context, the state of public opinion and question the legitimacy of Cabinet Ministers such as Wes Streeting and Shabana Mahmood deploying resource based arguments against the Bill and consider the role of religious belief in the public debate. The discussion also examines the parliamentary scrutiny process and the judiciary's role in safeguarding against coercion.   The episode further explores the controversial subject of non-crime hate incidents, critiquing current police practices and addressing the challenge of balancing the monitoring of hate speech with the protection of civil liberties.   This thought-provoking episode offers an in-depth analysis of two critical intersections of law and politics.

Is the cost of litigating free speech issues in the UK disproportionately high and what reforms might address the problem?   In this episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen, together with leading media lawyer Gavin Millar KC, debate the irony of the Daily Mail’s recent victory before the the European Court of Human Rights over the issue of the costs incurred in unsuccessfully defending the paper in high profile defamation and privacy claims. They explore the chilling effect of the eye-wateringly high legal costs involved in High Court litigation and Gavin suggests some radical reforms of the current system in order effectively to maintain the right balance between the right to freedom of expression and the right to defend privacy and reputational rights.     The trio also discuss Carole Cadwalladr’s pending case before the Strasbourg Court, the prospect of Labour enacting anti-SLAPP laws and the likelihood of bringing the Online Safety Act 2023 into full force given its potential to generate conflict with the Silicon Valley Broligarchy.   Tune in for an engaging conversation on media law, free speech, and the political dilemmas facing a new Labour government.

Join Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen in this episode of Double Jeopardy as they discuss significant legal developments, including the recent Court of Appeal judgment roundly rejecting Lucy Letby’s argument that pre-trial publicity made her retrial unfair. Are jurors really unaffected by prejudicial media reports? They also look at the fascinating political journey of the new Shadow Secretary of State for Justice, Robert Jenrick. Is his hard-right act real, or a pose? And why has Kemi Badenoch appointed someone whose trademark policy is withdrawal from the ECHR?   Finally, they check out new guidance issued by Attorney General Richard Hermer about the approach he wants government lawyers to take when they’re weighing legal arguments. Is this real change or just window dressing?

Barristers’ Core Duty Eight currently requires members of the Bar  not to discriminate unlawfully against any person. However, the Bar Standards Board now wishes to go further and create a new duty requiring barristers positively to  advance equality, diversity and inclusion in their professional lives.   In this episode of Double Jeopardy, hosts Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen look at the row this proposal has sparked. Joining them is Karon Monaghan KC, a barrister specialising in equality and human rights law from Matrix Chambers, who provides insight into the implications of the proposed change, arguing that it does not represent the unwelcome imposition of a contested (American) ideology originating in the frenetic racial politics of that country, but is simply a necessary evolution in the duty to promote a diverse and inclusive bar. She suggests that reasonable steps towards progress, rather than quotas in all but name, are the goal.   The episode also covers recent legal developments impacting women’s sex-based rights. And as she prepares, along with Beth Grossman,  to argue a landmark case in the Supreme Court, which will determine once and for all the legal definition of a woman, Karon provides insight into a pivotal question: Should a trans woman with a Gender Recognition Certificate be legally recognised as a woman under the Equality Act? The answer will have major ramifications for all sex-based rights in the UK.   Tune in to hear Ken, Tim, and Karon navigate the legal complexities surrounding EDI and Core Duty Eight and explore what these shifts might mean for the future of barristers’ professional obligations. Follow us on X/Twitter:  ⁠https://x.com/doubjeopardypod⁠ Follow us on LinkedIn:  ⁠https://www.linkedin.com/company/double-jeopardy-podcast/

With every aspect of our criminal justice system – the police, courts, prison system and probation service – in a state of apparently permanent crisis thanks to 15 years of systemic underfunding, there seems little hope of fundamental change any time soon.  Amidst the turmoil, Danny Shaw - a prominent voice in reporting and analysing criminal justice issues for 31 years at the BBC and, more recently, as an advisor to Home Secretary Yvette Cooper -  now finds himself shaping the very policies he once analysed. His unique experience, from the newsroom to influencing Labour’s criminal justice agenda, sets the stage for a profound exploration of the reality of reforming our crippled justice system. In this latest episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen sit down with Danny to dissect the formulation of Labour's crime policies and the continuing controversy arising from the shooting of Chris Kaba. Together, they navigate the delicate balance between political rhetoric and the practical realities of implementation without any promise of increased spending on justice. As they unravel these intricate dynamics, the discussion shifts to the broader debate on policing, highlighting the legal and moral dilemmas that arise in high-stakes, high-pressure situations. Against the background of the acquittal of Met Police Firearms officer Martyn Blake for the shooting of South London gangster Chris Kaba, the trio discuss the law of self-defence, prosecutorial discretion and police accountability,  critically assessing whether current legislation adequately protects the police and whether proposed reforms go far enough to address the root issues of trust and transparency within the justice system.  In a lively debate, Danny explains why he agrees with Met Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley’s strong attack on the CPS for charging Martyn Blake and why he thinks Ken and Tim are wrong to believe that the DPP does not require fresh guidance to ensure that the police officers only face criminal charges when the law and the evidence supports a charging decision.   Follow us on X/Twitter:  https://x.com/doubjeopardypod Follow us on LinkedIn:  https://www.linkedin.com/company/double-jeopardy-podcast/

Metropolitan Police firearms officer Martyn Blake has been acquitted of the murder of gangster Chris Kaba. He may still face the sack because the Independent Office for Police Conduct can pursue disciplinary actions even after a criminal acquittal. How does this process work? And what are the complexities in cases like this? Were the CPS right to prosecute and how does the law of self-defence impact the actions of armed officers? Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen are back to discuss these and other questions arising from police shootings. They look at the role of the CPS in deciding to prosecute police officers, and historical cases like that of Jean Charles Menezes. Do the rules around the prosecution of police officers need to change? Would the public really have confidence in a system that offered special protection from prosecution for police officers?   In this episode they also consider the growing scandal of Mohamed Al-Fayed’s apparent serial sex offending, and the atrocious police response to the complaints of scores of women. Follow us on X/Twitter:  ⁠https://x.com/doubjeopardypod⁠ Follow us on LinkedIn:  ⁠https://www.linkedin.com/company/double-jeopardy-podcast/

In recent episodes of Double Jeopardy, Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen have focused on the massive publicity surrounding the trial of Lucy Letby, and on the barrage of criticism of  the expert medical evidence used by the prosecution to prove that babies were deliberately harmed by Lucy Letby, rather than dying of natural causes in circumstances where premature babies are uniquely vulnerable to medical crisis.   In this episode Ken and Tim are joined by Dr Richard Latham, an NHS consultant forensic psychiatrist and expert witness who has huge experience of complex psycho-legal issues in criminal trials. In their discussion, they look at the duties and responsibilities of medics and scientists giving evidence in criminal proceedings.   How is a diagnosis of mental disorder or mental illness made where intent is a key issue? What is required for establishing the partial defence to murder of diminished responsibility, and how does it differ from insanity? What are the professional and ethical duties that  apply to experts instructed by the defence or the prosecution? And can it ever be appropriate for experts to speak out about a case they weren’t involved in, when they haven’t seen all the case materials?

As political rhetoric in the UK takes an alarming turn, Robert Jenrick’s recent statements link the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to British soldiers committing unlawful killings abroad. These claims have drawn fierce criticism, with experts warning that such accusations not only distort reality but also endanger military personnel in the field. In this latest episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen take a deeper look into the risks Jenrick’s assertions pose, not just for the reputation of the UK's armed forces, but for international law and military operations. The conversation also touches on the broader debate about the role of the ECHR and whether Britain should distance itself from the convention altogether. The pair then shift focus to Naomi Campbell’s charity, Fashion for Relief, which recently has come under intense scrutiny. The Charity Commission’s report has revealed a startling financial mismanagement, where only a small fraction of donations reached the intended causes. With millions raised but minimal impact, Ken and Tim unravel the findings, raising important questions about accountability and transparency in the world of celebrity philanthropy. Follow us on X/Twitter: https://x.com/doubjeopardypodFollow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/double-jeopardy-podcast/

In the latest episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen are joined by Lord Burnett of Maldon, the former Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales, to talk about punishment and the British addiction to prison. As one of five co-authors of a significant report on the subject (published by the Howard League in September) Lord Burnett shares his insights on the need for change in our approach to sentencing, the challenges within our overcrowded prisons, and the societal implications of the current punitive system. Together, the trio explore key questions such as why prison sentences have doubled in length over the past 50 years, whether longer sentences truly reduce crime, and the impact of political decision-making on our justice system. Ken and Tim also turn their attention to the damning allegations surrounding the late Mohamed Al-Fayed and the wider implications this case holds for the criminal justice system. This major scandal is just beginning.

In this latest episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen are joined by Akua Reindorf KC, a discrimination law expert at Cloisters Chambers, to discuss the Bar Standards Board's proposal to change a core duty of barristers from the requirement that they ‘should not unlawfully discriminate’ (which would be illegal), to a positive duty that they must ‘advance equality, diversity and inclusion in their practices’ (which is not a legal requirement).   The trio explore the implications of this change, and of the challenges it presents, not least because of the contested nature of EDI ideologies. They ask: Is this new duty just the latest manifestation of US racial politics gaslighting a Europe less tuned to its puritanical and divisive world view? And has the Bar Standards Board foolishly fallen victim to transatlantic ideological fashion, in a landgrab that will cause anger, confusion and dissent?   They also look at Labour Party politician David Blunkett’s potential role in leading a government review of sentencing policies, reflecting on his draconian contributions to increased sentencing over decades. Is the news of his potential appointment another nail in the coffin of satire?

In this latest episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen are joined by Sarah Vine, a KC at Doughty Street Chambers, to discuss the sensitive and difficult issue of the way in which trials of rape and other serious sexual offences are conducted.    The trio discuss the complexities surrounding trials of sexual offences, particularly focusing on the special measures introduced to support vulnerable witnesses. They explore the implications of these measures, including Section 28 evidence, and the unintended consequences that have arisen, such as lower conviction rates.    The conversation closes with a discussion on the recent sentencing of Huw Edwards, examining the principles applied by the judge, and the public response. Was it right not to send him straight to prison? Be sure to follow us on X: https://x.com/doubjeopardypod Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/double-jeopardy-podcast/

In this latest episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen are joined by Dan Neidle, Founder of Tax Policy Associates, to explore the finances of Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, the far-right street agitator and self-styled journalist who calls himself Tommy Robinson. The trio explore how Yaxley-Lennon has monetised his presence on the internet through ‘donations’ and ‘gifts’ from his followers, which are then passed through multiple off-the-shelf companies. Ken, Tim and Dan investigate the tax implications of these ‘donations’, and the potential tax liabilities that Yaxley-Lennon may face now that HMRC has reportedly opened an investigation into him. To close the episode, Ken & Tim also touch on the Grenfell Inquiry Report and the glacial pace of criminal investigations in the UK justice system, highlighting the inefficiencies in the UK's investigative and legal processes as well as the need for major investment in the system. Be sure to follow us on X / Twitter: https://x.com/doubjeopardypod Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/double-jeopardy-podcast/

Hidden under the cloak of online anonymity, individuals in the UK have been charged and convicted of inciting and encouraging criminal behaviour without actively getting involved themselves.    Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen analyse the debate triggered in the wake of the August 2024 riots across the UK; should we and how do we regulate the internet more closely without infringing the fundamental right to freedom of expression? Ken and Tim debate the differences between the US and European approaches to regulating the internet, with a focus on Section 230 of the US Federal Communications Act, recent decisions of the US Supreme Court and the EU Digital Services Act which is designed to prevent illegal and harmful activities online and the spread of disinformation. They also discuss the Online Safety Act 2023 and the challenge of balancing freedom of speech with the need to combat harmful content online.    Follow us on X/Twitter: https://x.com/doubjeopardypod  Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/double-jeopardy-podcast/

The case of Lucy Letby is one of the most controversial cases in British legal history. As is well known, the neonatal nurse is currently serving 15 whole-life sentences for the murder of seven infants and the attempted murder of eight others. Her application for leave to appeal her convictions returned at her first trial was firmly rejected by the Court of Appeal on 2nd July 2024 as unarguable.    In this episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen respond to comments and criticisms received after discussing the Lucy Letby case in the most recent episode ‘Lucy Letby: The Shadow of a Doubt?"   Ken and Tim respond to listeners addressing concerns about the fairness of the trial process and the credibility of the Court of Appeal process. They also discuss the recent admission by the Crown Prosecution Service that certain evidence was mislabeled at the original trial and whether this affects the conclusion that Lucy Letby’s convictions are safe. They explore the possibility of reopening the appeal and the potential for a different approach to reviewing scientific evidence before the Court of Appeal.    Follow us on X/Twitter: ⁠https://x.com/doubjeopardypod⁠ Follow us on LinkedIn ⁠https://www.linkedin.com/company/double-jeopardy-podcast/

The case of Lucy Letby generated shock, revulsion and bewilderment, casting a long shadow over the trust that we place in those who care for the most vulnerable.  In the latest episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken and Tim discuss one of the most controversial cases in British legal history—the conviction of Lucy Letby, the neonatal nurse sentenced to 15 whole-life sentences for the murder of seven infants and the attempted murder of eight others. Ken and Tim explore the widespread media coverage and the intense public reaction to Letby’s case, including the growing number of conspiracy theories that have emerged on the internet as well as more serious articles in reputable media outlets. They critically examine the arguments put forth by those questioning her conviction and discuss the Court of Appeal's comprehensive rejection of her application for leave to appeal and the refusal to admit fresh expert evidence. They emphasise that any discussion about a miscarriage of justice must start with an understanding of the basis for the Court of Appeal’s rejection of Lucy Letby’s appeal. The episode also touches on the upcoming public inquiry to be Chaired by Lady Justice Thirlwall (which will investigate events at the Countess of Chester hospital and whether the management structure at the hospital contributed to the failure to protect babies from Letby’s actions) and whether the public inquiry has the potential to generate new evidence that may form the basis for a second appeal following a referral by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Tim and Ken aim to shed light on the complexity of the case and are critical of those who have questioned Letby’s guilt without understanding the details of the case and the dynamics of a criminal trial. They stress the importance of basing any claims of a miscarriage of justice on a thorough understanding of the evidence, the legal processes involved and especially the details of the 58 page Judgment of the Court of Appeal handed down on 2nd July 2024.   Follow us on X/Twitter: https://x.com/doubjeopardypod Follow us on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/company/double-jeopardy-podcast/

“UK riots shops boarded up as England braces for rioting. Thousands of officers on standby as police plan for up to 100 disturbances and 30 counter protests’ In this episode of Double Jeopardy Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen sit down to discuss the planned riots in response to the tragic Southport incident looking at how Keir Starmer is responding, the role of the courts and the suggestion we need to use anti-terrorism laws to deal with the rioters. Ken and Tim also touch on the 2011 riots which spread from a protest about the shooting of Mark Duggan by police in Tottenham where 2,158 people were convicted of involvement in the 2011 riots, leading to prison sentences totalling more than 1,800 years. Follow us on X: https://x.com/doubjeopardypod Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/double-jeopardy-podcast/

After spending the best part of 15 years in party politics, Sarah Lunnon now believes that responding to the climate emergency needs a new democracy, a revolution rather than reform. In this episode of Double Jeopardy, Ken Macdonald and Tim Owen are joined by Sarah Lunnon, former Green Party Councillor and Co-founder of Just Stop Oil, to discuss the lengthy sentences recently handed down on 5 Just Stop Oil activists for their actions in attempting to create gridlock in London and the South of England in November 2022 and the impact these sentences may have on future protests. They also debate the failure of the government to take effective action on climate change and the role of civil disobedience in driving change.   The discussion raises questions about the legitimacy and effectiveness of harsh punishment and whether the UK is out of step with other European countries in terms of sentencing climate protesters. Follow us on X: https://x.com/doubjeopardypod Follow us on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/double-jeopardy-podcast/