An application was made for the quashing of two acquittals for murder and for a retrial.
Held: It would take only compelling new evidence of guilt to justify the quashing of an acquittal. The evidence of a witness who was ready to say whatever suited him could not count as such. The appeal failed.
‘Each case depends on its facts. The bar for the Crown is, as counsel rightly recognises, a high one. In particular, it is not enough that the new evidence presents the defendant with a case to answer. The time to present him with a case to answer is at the time of his trial. There are very powerful reasons why there ought normally to be a single trial, at which all the evidence on either side is assembled and assessed, and which produces an outcome which, whether conviction or acquittal, is, subject to any error of law or principle exposed on appeal, final. It is only where there is compelling new evidence of guilt, of the kind which cannot realistically be disputed, that the exceptional step of quashing an acquittal will be justified.’
Judges:
Hughes LJ VP, Penry-Davey, Stadlen JJ
Citations:
[2009] EWCA Crim 1207, [2009] EWCA Crim 1077, Times 09-Jul-2009, [2009] Crim LR 738
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Dobson CACD 18-May-2011
Retrial After Acquittal – New Scientific Evidence
The court heard an application for the quashing of a verdict of not guilty and the retrial of a defendant for the murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993. Other defendants previously acquitted were not to be tried, but a defendant not previously tried . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.347228