The court considered when a jury might be allowed to change its verdict. one of the jurors delivered a verdict of not guilty. The clerk heard, so did the chairman, who heard the same words. The prisoner was discharged from the dock. Others of the jury interfered. They said the verdict was guilty. The prisoner was brought back to the dock. The chairman asked the jury what the verdict was. All the 12 jurors answered that it was guilty. They had been unanimous. The chairman asked Owen Hughes why he had said ‘not guilty’, to which he replied that he had said ‘guilty’. A verdict of guilty was recorded.
Held: Pollock CB said: ‘We do not think the Court is called upon to say at what interval of time a correction should be made. All we do is to say that in the present case the interval was not too long. Nothing has been done but what daily takes place in the ordinary transactions in life; namely, a mistake is corrected within a reasonable time, and on the very spot on which it was made.’
References: (1853) Dears 229, (1853) 169 ER 706
Judges: Pollock CB
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:
- Cited – Regina v Millward CACD 7-Apr-1998
The defendant was tried for causing grievous bodily harm. After a majority direction, the jury returned, finding him guity. When asked if this was ‘the verdict of you all’, the formean replied ‘Yes’. The day after, he wrote to the judge to say that . .
([1998] EWCA Crim 1203, [1999] 1 Cr App R 61) - Cited – Regina v Andrews 1986
Two defendants were tried for causing injuries to one child. The jury convicted the female defendant, of positive acts of cruelty against the child and returned a verdict of not guilty of those acts in respect of the male defendant. After the police . .
((1986) 82 Cr App R 148)
These lists may be incomplete.
Last Update: 27 November 2020; Ref: scu.192261