The defendant appealed convictions for causing explosions likely to endanger life. Subsequent evidence had come to light through the investigations of the Criminal Cases Review Commission, and he appealed. Various bomb material caches had been found, and the defendant’s fingerprints were found on them. Evidence suggesting that a different group of men were responsible was withheld from the defence. The defendant asserted innocent explanations for the fingerprints. The fingerprint experts also disagreed as to the value of the marks found. The court could not be sure that a jury hearing the evidence would have convicted. As to the non-disclosure, the impact of the fresh evidence on the case is not conclusive, but it is such as to render the verdict of the jury unsafe.
Judges:
Lord Justice Swinton Thomas Mr Justice Garland And Mr Justice Longmore
Citations:
[1998] EWCA Crim 3524
Links:
Statutes:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Evidence
Updated: 16 September 2022; Ref: scu.156398