The defendant appealed conviction for the murder of her husband. It was said she had injected him with a fatal dose of insulin. He was incapacitated but not diabetic.
Held: The deceased’s brain had been destroyed before any prosecution was anticipated, and no stay would have been proper for abuse of process. The defence’s inability to examine it did not make the proceedings an abuse. The judge was right to leave to the jury the expert evidence that the source of the insulin was exogenous (injected). Acknowledging the unusual complexity and importance of the expert evidence, the court admitted new medical evidence on appeal. Even so, the case remained clear that the only explanation for the hypoglyceamia was exogenous insulin. The test (Pendleton) was not whether the court believed the defendant to be guilty but whether the conviction was safe. In this case it was.
Judges:
Lord Justice Dyson Mr Justice Harrison The Honourable Mr Justice Cooke
Citations:
[2002] EWCA Crim 2950
Links:
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Medway CACD 25-Mar-1999
The court considered a complaint as to the prosecution’s failure to preserve evidence: ‘We recognise that in cases where evidence has been tampered with, lost or destroyed it may well be that a defendant will be disadvantaged. It does not . .
Cited – Regina v Jones (Steven Martin) CACD 23-Jul-1996
The defendant appealed his conviction for murder wishing to bring in evidence of his diminished responsibility at the time of the offence.
Held: The evidence was admitted, but the conviction was upheld. The court took the opportunity to give . .
Cited – Regina v Pendleton HL 13-Dec-2001
The defendant had appealed his conviction for murder to the Court of Appeal. The 1968 Act required the court to consider whether the conviction was unsafe. New evidence was before the Court of Appeal, but they had rejected the appeal.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178539