Poole and Mills v Regina: CACD 17 Jun 2003

The case was a reference from the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The defendants had been convicted in 1990 of murder. The House of Lords had dismissed an earlier appeal. Police officers had allowed statements to be put forward which were false in critical aspects, and had threatened witnesses to avoid their attendance at court.
Held: The divisional court had expressed doubts about the conviction. It was now, after Pendleton, wrong to hold that there were substantial improprieties in a conviction, but that it could still be upheld because it would not have affected the jury. Once a case had been successfully referred to the court, the court whilst respecting the Commission, could consider additional grounds. Here, new challenges had been made to the introduction within a witness statement of a rehearsal of evidence given by another witness, which evidence was prejudicial and hearsay. Appeal allowed.
Lord Justice Auld Mr Justice Simon Mr Justice Keith
[2003] EWCA Crim 1753, Times 26-Jun-2003, 2002/02985S2, Gazette 28-Aug-2003, [2003] 1 WLR 2931
Bailii
Criminal Appeal Act 1995 14(5)
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedRegina v Smith (Wallace Duncan) (No 3) CACD 28-Nov-2002
The appellant was supported in his appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. In addition the appellant sought to permission raise other grounds of appeal. The prosecution asserted that the court could filter the grounds of appeal already . .
CitedRegina v Thomas CACD 29-Apr-2002
The appellant appealed his conviction for murder. The prosecution case had been that the victim died before a certain time. Witness had come to light after the first trial who knew her, and claimed to have seen her after the time of death according . .
CitedRegina v Pendleton HL 13-Dec-2001
The defendant had appealed his conviction for murder to the Court of Appeal. The 1968 Act required the court to consider whether the conviction was unsafe. New evidence was before the Court of Appeal, but they had rejected the appeal.
Held: . .
CitedRegina v Edwards CACD 31-Jan-1996
Police evidence which had been impugned by suggestions of perjury was not to be used not to found a conviction. A senior officer can be in a position to infect the whole investigative process and evidence so as to render the conviction unsafe: ‘Once . .

Cited by:
CitedSmith (Wallace Duncan), Regina v (No 4) CACD 17-Mar-2004
The defendant appealed convictions for fraudulent trading and obtaining property by deception, saying that the English court could not prosecute an offence committed principally in the US.
Held: Provided some substantial element (here the . .
CitedRegina v Stock CACD 8-Aug-2008
The defendant sought to appeal his conviction in 1970 for robbery. He had refused to attend an identity parade but was then confronted with the main witness. Witnesses had also been shown photographs from which they were said to have selected the . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 21 May 2021; Ref: scu.183706