Which meetings may the court forbid between a detained accused and visitors who are not defence counsel, and on what finding?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In a practice file we read the court's written ruling and, where the order came from the prosecution, the prosecutor's application asking for it, since the provision allows only those two routes. We also read the custody record showing the accused is detained, and the visitor and document-handling records showing whose meetings and exchanges the order reached.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading sets the whole chain of conditions together: the court, acting on its own initiative or on the prosecution's application, and by a ruling, may forbid meetings between a detained accused and persons other than those the cross-reference covers, only where there is 'substantial reason' to fear that the accused will escape or destroy evidence of the crime; the court may also bar the exchange of documents and other things, or inspect or seize them.
Another reading stresses the exception written into the provision: clothing, food and medical supplies may not be barred from exchange nor seized, so an order reaching those items goes beyond what the provision permits, however strong the fear of escape or destruction of evidence.
Your judgment
Which visitors in this file fall outside the cross-reference the provision relies on, and what in the papers shows their position?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to change the exception for clothing, food and medical supplies, or if a decision clarifies who the cross-reference covers or what counts as substantial reason.