The first defendant appealed, submitting that he did not receive a fair trial because a juror had discovered on the internet prejudicial information about him and passed that information on to the other jurors, being information which was not, it was agreed, relevant and admissible.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The difficulty had been identified, and the judge had done what he could by way of clear directions to ensure that the jury disregarded the materials. Nevertheless tere was a real possibility that one or more of the jurors would not follow the directions.
Judges:
Hooper LJ, Nelson, Maddison JJ
Citations:
[2009] Crim LR 357, [2008] EWCA Crim 2359
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Criminal Practice
Updated: 29 September 2022; Ref: scu.277884