DC (Leggatt LJ, May J)
5 February 2020
A 61-year-old man who had posted on his Facebook page photographs purporting to be of the convicted murderers Jon Venables and Robert Thompson, in breach of a worldwide injunction prohibiting the publication of their identity, was given a sentence of four months’ imprisonment suspended for two years.
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Burnett LCJ, Warby J, Edis J)
17 September 2019
A challenge, by way of judicial review, by a young offender convicted of the murder and rape of a 14-year-old girl, to an excepting direction which discharged a reporting restriction order imposed under the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 s.45(3), was refused.
CA (Crim Div) (Leggatt LJ, Nicol J, Butcher J)
27 June 2019
The court considered the principles applicable where the prosecution called a witness but only considered part of their evidence worthy of belief, and wished to adduce other evidence to contradict the part that it considered inaccurate or false, without applying to have the witness declared hostile.
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, Picken J, Swift J)
13 June 2019
A trial judge had been entitled to admit bad character evidence following a Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.101(1)(e) application by an accused’s co-defendant, as going towards the accused’s propensity to tell the truth, despite having refused the prosecution’s s.101(1)(d) application to admit the same bad character evidence due to its weaknesses.
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, McGowan J, Judge Burbidge QC)
31 January 2019
A judge had erred in excluding identification evidence, namely an image taken from a social media site, under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 s.78 because of a “very significant risk” that the complainant had been influenced by the person who showed the image to him. There had been no proper basis for reaching such a conclusion.
DC (Sir Brian Leveson PQBD, McGowan J)
1 November 2018
The court quashed convictions where critical information had been taken from the Preparation for Effective Trial form and wrongly treated as evidence.
CA (Crim Div) (Hamblen LJ, Sweeney J, Judge Kinch QC)
1 March 2018
A conviction for robbery was safe where defence counsel had made a tactical decision, with the offender’s agreement, not to apply to discharge the jury after the victims named a person relied on by the offender in his alibi as an additional suspect.
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, Holgate J, Sir Kenneth Parker)
8 September 2017
The appellant’s conviction for wounding with intent was not rendered unsafe by the fact that he was tried in his absence. By absenting himself despite knowing of the trial date, he had waived his right to attend his trial, and he had been represented by competent counsel.
CA (Crim Div) (Flaux LJ, Haddon-Cave J, Cheema-Grubb J)
16 May 2017
An offender who had pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit fraud, but denied an offence of theft, had the theft conviction quashed where unbeknownst to him, the witness who had identified him had a previous fraud-related conviction. There was a real possibility that the jury would have reached a different verdict if they had known about the witness’ conviction.
CA (Crim Div) (Burnett LJ, Wyn Williams J, Supperstone J)
13 December 2016
A judge at a Newton hearing determining whether an individual had been involved in another robbery, beyond those he had admitted to, had been entitled to admit identification evidence from a police officer despite the officer’s failure to take contemporaneous notes. It was not mandatory to exclude his evidence on that basis, and he had submitted a witness statement and been cross-examined on it at the Newton hearing.