The claimant had been convicted of murder and his appeal had failed. He now sought disclosure of the forensic material held by the police to his own legal team.
Held: Permission to apply for review was granted, but the claim failed. ‘It is necessary to show something that materially may cast doubt upon the safety of the conviction before the duty of the police and the CPS as set out in the Attorney General’s Guidelines and the CPS Guidance arises . . there is nothing in all the material which has been put before us so carefully by Ms Hickman, Dr Short and Mr Southey QC which might cast doubt on the safety of the conviction or from which we could conclude that there are items which, if tested, might reasonably be anticipated to provide a result which might affect the safety of the conviction. There is, therefore, nothing which gives rise to a duty to make disclosure of the files of the Forensic Science Service or to enable material to be re-tested.’
May LJ P, Haddon-Cave J
 EWHC 1186 (Admin)
Prosecution of Offences Act 1985, Criminal Procedure and Investigation Act 1996 7A
England and Wales
Cited – Regina v Puddick 1865
Crompton J directed the jury as to the duty of the prosecutor in a criminal trial: ‘I hope that in the exercise of the privilege granted by the new Act to counsel for the prosecution of summing up the evidence, they will not cease to remember that . .
Cited – Rex v Banks 1916
Cited – Boucher v The Queen 1954
(Supreme Court of Canada) The prosecutor in a criminal case has a duty to act impartially with no notion of winning or losing.
Randall J said: ‘It cannot be over-emphasised that the purpose of a criminal prosecution is not to obtain a . .
Cited – McIlkenny v Chief Constable of the West Midlands CA 1980
The appellant had been convicted of an IRA bombing, causing loss of many lives. The appellant and his other co-accused alleged that their confessions had been induced by police violence. The trial judge ruled that their confessions were voluntary . .
Cited – Regina v Stinchombe 1991
(Supreme Court of Canada) Sopinka J described the fruits of a police investigation as: ‘not the property of the Crown for use in securing a conviction, but the property of the public to be used to ensure that justice is done.’ . .
Cited – Regina v Ward (Judith) CACD 15-Jul-1992
The defendant had been wrongly convicted of IRA bombings. She said that the prosecution had failed to disclose evidence.
Held: The prosecution’s forensic scientists are under a common law duty to disclose to the defence anything they may . .
Cited – Regina v Mills, Regina v Poole HL 24-Jul-1997
The prosecution have a duty to disclose to the defence the statement of an adverse witness and not just to provide the name and address, even though that person was not seen as credible witness by the prosecution. ‘the rule in Bryant and Dickson is . .
Cited – Hodgson, Regina v CACD 18-Mar-2009
The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder.
Held: The appeal succeeded. After many years in prison, the original exhibits had been located and subjected to DNA analysis which proved that the defendant could not, despite his . .
Cited – Taylor and Others v Director of The Serious Fraud Office and Others HL 29-Oct-1998
The defendant had requested the Isle of Man authorities to investigate the part if any taken by the plaintiff in a major fraud. No charges were brought against the plaintiff, but the documents showing suspicion came to be disclosed in the later . .
Cited – A v Secretary of State for the Home Department, and X v Secretary of State for the Home Department HL 16-Dec-2004
The applicants had been imprisoned and held without trial, being suspected of international terrorism. No criminal charges were intended to be brought. They were foreigners and free to return home if they wished, but feared for their lives if they . .
Cited – Regina v Connor and another; Regina v Mirza HL 22-Jan-2004
The defendants sought an enquiry as to events in the jury rooms on their trials. They said that the secrecy of a jury’s deliberations did not fit the human right to a fair trial. In one case, it was said that jurors believed that the defendant’s use . .
Cited – Randall v The Queen PC 16-Apr-2002
(Cayman Islands) The defendant complained that the conduct of prosecuting counsel at his trial had been such as to undermine the fairness of his trial. Counsel had repeatedly and disparagingly interrupted cross-examinations, and the summing up.
Cited – Regina v Criminal Cases Review Commission ex parte Pearson Admn 18-May-1999
The defendant sought judicial review of the decision not to refer her case back to the court of appeal. She had been convicted of the murder of her hsuband’s new partner. She said it had been her husband.
Held: The court set out the approach . .
Cited – Practice Direction (Justices: Clerk to Court) 2-Oct-2000
Lord Woolf gave guidance as to the duties of the clerk to the magistrates as to the manner of assistance to be provided to them. He set out that it was the responsibility of the legal adviser to provide the justices with any advice they might . .
Appeal from – Nunn, Regina (on The Application of) v Chief Constable of Suffolk Constabulary and Another SC 18-Jun-2014
Limits to Duty To Investigate
The claimant had been convicted of a murder. He continued to protest his innocence, and now sought judicial review of the respondent’s decision not to act upon his requests for further investigations which might prove his innocence.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Police, Criminal Practice
Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.454583