Appeal from conviction of obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception. He had obtained work with a bank having ticked a form to deny any unspent convictions. The Bank would not have taken him on with the convictions. He said that the form had been completed by the employment agency. A note from a juror had suggested possible doubt.
Held: The judge had dealth properly with the note: ‘ The directions in law to the jury were entirely correct, and these notes simply reveal that at some stage in their deliberations one or more jurors were uncertain as to whether there was sufficient evidence. The judge reminded the jury they would not receive further evidence and that they must base their decision on the evidence in the case. Having received that direction, the jury returned a unanimous verdict. This demonstrates no more than a stage in the process of the jury’s consideration of this case, when there was a clear element of uncertainty, and it does not arguably reveal an ‘inconsistency’ with the final verdict or some other event that renders this conviction unsafe.’
Fulford LJ, Jay J, Batty QC HHJ
[2016] EWCA Crim 548
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
See Also – Hussain, Regina v (No 2) CACD 28-Apr-2016
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 14 January 2022; Ref: scu.562923