The fact that the reputation of a forensic expert on whose evidence a conviction was based had been undermined would not always mean that the conviction would be overturned. Though the Crown conceded in this case that the conviction was now unsafe, ‘it does not necessarily follow from these criticisms that every case resulting in a conviction in which Dr Heath gave evidence for the Crown should or will be treated as unsafe. We expect the Crown to do what the Crown has done here, which is to analyse the precise nature and importance of Dr Heath’s evidence to the conviction in the light of the particular circumstances of the individual case and the issues which arose at trial. Even if Dr Heath’s evidence was challenged at trial, it does not follow that the convictions will all be unsafe. Some will remain safe, even if his evidence lent support to the Crown’s case’
Sir Igor Judge P Qbd, Forbes, Treacy Jj
[2006] EWCA Crim 3222
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Noye, Kenneth, Regina v CACD 22-Mar-2011
The prisoner appealed against his conviction for murder on reference from the CCRC. There were new doubts about the reliabiity of the expert forensic expert.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. Dr H’s evidence did not impinge on the essential . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Evidence
Updated: 11 December 2021; Ref: scu.428553