Regina v Karakaya: CACD 16 Feb 2005

No Internet Research for juror

After conclusion of the trial, the jury bailiff discovered notes in the jury room which indictated that the jury, after they had retired for their verdict, had read and discussed notes obtained by a juror from the Internet relating to the case.
Held: Applying Mirza, the court could examine the materials found. ‘[T]he material obtained by the juror from the internet after the jury had retired, contravened the principles which prohibit the use of information, potentially relevant to the outcome of the case, privately obtained out of court by a juror, as well as the reception of further material after the jury’s retirement. Having considered the material, we are not satisfied that these convictions are safe. ‘ The court suggested that the Judicial Studies Board might consider guidance on judicial directions to cover these and related issues.

Lord Justice Judge, Cresswell, Deputy Chief Justice of England And Wales, Fulford J
[2005] EWCA Crim 346, Times 28-Feb-2005, [2005] 2 Cr App R 5, [2005] Crim LR 574
England and Wales
CitedRegina v Owen CCA 1952
The trial judge allowed a doctor who had already given evidence in the case, to be recalled to give evidence in answer to a question raised by the jury after its retirement.
Held: The conviction was quashed: ‘ . . Once the summing up is . .
CitedRegina v Connor and another; Regina v Mirza HL 22-Jan-2004
Extension of Inquiries into Jury Room Activities
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 . .
CitedRegina v Wilson QBD 1957
‘The principle that, once the summing up is concluded, no further evidence ought to be given, must be maintained in every case, and, if further evidence is allowed at that stage, . . the conviction will be quashed.’ The court considered the nature . .
CitedRegina v Gearing CACD 1966
Lord Parker CJ said: ‘It has always been a very strict rule of this court that no evidence whatever must be introduced after the jury have retired.’ . .
CitedRegina v Sanderson CCA 1953
It was permissible for the evidence for a witness for the defence (only) to be taken after the summing up had been completed, but before the jury had retired. . .
CitedRegina v Davis (George) CACD 1976
After retirement, the jury requested, and was inadvertently supplied with a copy of a statement made by a witness to the police. The statement had been used by defence counsel for the purposes of cross-examination, but the document itself had not . .
CitedRegina v Stewart and Sappleton CACD 1989
After retirement, the jury requested provision of scales which were given. The defendants faced an accusation of importing cannabis of a certain weight, and claimed to have been unaware of the presence of the cannabis in their bags.
Held: Once . .
CitedRegina v Maggs CACD 1990
The charge was of causing death by dangerous driving. Sketch plans with measurements were supplied to the jury. They asked for and were given a tape measure. The defendant appealed.
Held: Though once they retired the hjury should not be given . .
CitedRegina v Thomas (Horatio Gerald) CACD 9-Feb-1987
The jury had, after retirement, requested and been given a map which had not been referred to in the case. Counsel were not consulted.
Held: The use of the map was a material irregularity: ‘It is hardly necessary to say that an action of this . .
CitedRegina v Oliver (Ian) CACD 6-Dec-1995
Detailed guidance was given on directions when a jury are to be allowed to split up overnight after retiring using the court’s discretion under s43, including ‘1. That the jury must decide the case on the evidence and the arguments which they have . .
CitedRegina v Fricker CACD 24-Jun-1999
The defendant was charged with attempting to handle stolen tyres, a juror, with highly specialised knowledge of tyre manufacturing asked, after retirement, and was allowed by the judge to take this knowledge into account.
Held: Where a juror . .

Cited by:
CitedAttorney General v Fraill and Another CACD 16-Jun-2011
Juror’s use of Facebook was contempt
The court considered whether a juror had committed contempt of court. She had communicated with a defendant via Facebook, despite explicit warnings not to use the internet.
Held: Both juror and defendant in the trial had committed contempt of . .
CitedCadman v Regina CACD 3-Jul-2008
Appeal from conviction of fraud – material provided to the jury after retirement which had not been used during the trial and made available to be challenged.
Held: Conviction set aside: ‘For the jury to use the extraneous material provided . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 20 November 2021; Ref: scu.223105