Appeal against a conviction for murder brought upon one issue, namely whether a failure by the prosecution to make proper disclosure under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 rendered the trial of the appellant unfair and the verdict unsafe.
Held: The risk of injustice that a circumstantial evidence direction is designed to confront is that (1) speculation might become a substitute for the drawing of a sure inference of guilt and (2) the jury will neglect to take account of evidence that, if accepted, tends to diminish or even to exclude the inference of guilt.
[2015] EWCA Crim 817
Bailii
Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – McGreevy v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 1973
No Need for Direction on Circumstantial Evidence
M was charged with murdering Margaret Magee in her house. no one claimed to have seen the murder and the evidence was entirely circumstantial. When he was first tried, the jury failed to reach a verdict, but at a subsequent trial he was found guilty . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 30 December 2021; Ref: scu.546831