(Trinidad and Tobago) The Board granted special leave for the defendant to appeal his conviction for murder and sentence to death. The murder was committed during a violent robbery and the defendant convicted as part of the joint enterprise. He said the judge had misdirected the jury as to the elements of joint enterprise, saying the actual killer had acted outside the expected scope of the robbery.
Held: The appeal failed. A possible confusion of the intentions and consequences had been cured by other parts of the direction. In fact the judge had been more generous to the defendant than was required. There had also been a slight misdirection as to the possibility that the actual killer had additional motives. Again the result caused no prejudice.
Citations:
[1996] UKPC 27
Links:
Citing:
Cited – Chan Wing-Siu v The Queen PC 21-Jun-1984
The appellant and co-accused were charged with murder. They said they had gone to meet the deceased to collect a debt, but had been attacked with a knife by the deceased. Two of the three had knives and knew of the other knife.
Held: All were . .
Cited – Regina v Cheema CACD 5-Sep-1993
There is no rule requiring full a corroboration direction to be given for a co-defendant’s evidence to be admitted. The Court of Appeal recommended a review of law on corroboration of a witness’s evidence. Lord Taylor CJ said: ‘The rule of practice . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Commonwealth
Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.159183