The defendant’s appeal based on the absence of a good character direction had succeeded. The court now gave its reasons.
Held: After reviewing the authorities, the appeal succeeded: ‘the learned judge was wrong to find that the fact that evidence, depending on the jury’s view, was relevant to an issue in the trial ‘disentitled’ the appellant to a good character direction. The judge’s analysis of the issue was unduly restrictive and did not address the probative value of the appellant’s ‘good’ character. It deprived the appellant of a direction to which he was entitled in the circumstances . . the judge should have given a modified good character direction which made reference both to the jury’s judgment of the appellant’s credibility and the absence in his record of any propensity to commit sexual offences. In our judgment there was no danger that such a direction would fail to meet the requirements of common sense.’
Judges:
Pitchford LJ, Underhill, Simon JJ
Citations:
[2012] EWCA Crim 2033
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Vye etc CACD 7-Apr-1993
Detailed guidance was given on good character directions, as to how and when they should be given, but: ‘Provided that the judge indicates to the jury the two respects in which good character may be relevant, ie credibility and propensity, this . .
Cited – Regina v Gray CACD 30-Apr-2004
The court examined the authorities as to good chracter directions where a defendant had previous convictions. Rix LJ said: ‘In our judgment the authorities discussed above entitled us to state the following principles as applicable in this context: . .
Cited – Regina v Aziz; Regina v Tosun; Regina v Yorganci HL 16-Jun-1995
The defendant (one of three) relied upon his part exculpatory statement made in interview and did not give evidence. The judge said that his good character was relevant as to his own propensity, and the character of the others was relevant to their . .
Cited – Regina v Durbin CACD 1995
The appellant had been convicted of the importation of 875 kilos of cannabis. He had spent convictions but more significantly he admitted in interview being engaged in smuggling other contraband goods. Furthermore, he admitted telling lies to the . .
Cited – Regina v Sweet-Escott 1971
It is the duty of the trial judge to prevent cross examination about a subject which can only go to the credit of a witness if the truth of the matter suggested would not, in his opinion, affect the credibility of the witness concerned. Lawton J . .
Cited – Regina v Challenger and Nye 1982
When the jury is being directed to consider the issue of character, whether as to propensity or credibility, a primary consideration is that they should not be misled. . .
Cited – Regina v Heath CACD 1-Feb-1994
The defendant complained that the judge had wrongly admitted details of past spent convictions. The judge had told the jury ‘entirely to ignore them as far as this case is concerned’.
Held: The convictions were ‘so lacking in significance to . .
Cited – Regina v Zoppola-Barraza CACD 6-May-1994
The appellant had been convicted of importing cocaine. He had no previous convictions. However, he gave evidence that he had been smuggling gold and jewels into the UK so as to avoid duty and VAT. The Recorder directed the jury to have regard to the . .
Cited – Regina v Martin (David Paul) CACD 5-Jan-2000
Where a defendant had previous cautions, a judge was not obliged to give a good character direction. The court could distinguish between the two halves of the standard direction, and to include the credibility part of the direction, but to omit the . .
Cited – Regina v PD CACD 26-Jan-2012
The appellant was charged with offences of violence against his wife. He also faced charges of anal rape of his wife. In the course of evidence the appellant, who otherwise had no previous convictions, admitted using violence towards his wife during . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.464685
