Regina v Russell-Jones: CACD 1995

The Crown cannot be required to adduce evidence which (or to tender for cross-examination a witness whose evidence) is not capable of belief: ‘. . . the prosecution ought normally to call or offer to call all the witnesses who give direct evidence of the primary facts of the case, unless for good reason, in any instance, the prosecutor regards the witness’s evidence as unworthy of belief. In most cases the jury should have available all of that evidence as to what actually happened, which the prosecution, when serving statements, considered to be material, even if there are inconsistencies between one witness and another. The defence cannot always be expected to call for themselves witnesses of the primary facts whom the prosecution has discarded. For example, the evidence they may give, albeit at variance with other evidence called by the Crown, may well be detrimental to the defence case. If what a witness of the primary facts has to say is properly regarded by the prosecution as being incapable of belief, or as some of the authorities say ‘incredible’, then his evidence cannot help the jury assess the overall picture of the crucial events; hence, it is not unfair that he should not be called . . .
The prosecutor is also, as we have said, the primary judge of whether or not a witness to the material events is incredible, or unworthy of belief. It goes without saying that he could not properly condemn a witness as incredible merely because, for example, he gives an account at variance with that of a larger number of witnesses, and one which is less favourable to the prosecution case than that of the others.
A prosecutor properly exercising his discretion will not therefore be obliged to proffer a witness merely in order to give the defence material with which to attack the credit of other witnesses on whom the Crown relies. To hold otherwise would, in truth, be to assert that the prosecution are obliged to call a witness for no purpose other than to assist the defence in its endeavour to destroy the Crown’s own case. No sensible rule of justice could require such a stance to be taken.’

Judges:

Kennedy LJ

Citations:

[1995] 1 CAR 538, [1995] 3 All ER 239

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v W (Reference Under Section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1972) CACD 8-May-2003
The allegation was of a serious assault on the defendant’s wife. The prosecution considered she would not be a reliable witness, and did not call her. Other evidence being inadmissible, the defendant was acquitted. The AG appealed.
Held: There . .
CitedRegina v Mills, Regina v Poole HL 24-Jul-1997
The prosecution have a duty to disclose to the defence the statement of an adverse witness and not just to provide the name and address, even though that person was not seen as credible witness by the prosecution. ‘the rule in Bryant and Dickson is . .
CitedGrant v The Queen PC 16-Jan-2006
(Jamaica) The defendant appealed his conviction for murder saying that the admission of an unsworn statement by one witness and the non-admission of another similar statement who did not either attend court was unconstitutional. He shot the victim . .
CitedRegina v Cairns; Regina v Zaldi, Regina v Chaudary CACD 22-Nov-2002
The defendants applied for the defence statements of co-defendants to be disclosed. A co-defendant was to give evidence for the Crown, and they sought to have it excluded as unreliable.
Held: The 1996 Act created a duty of secondary . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 12 December 2022; Ref: scu.181981

Fox v Regina: CACD 2 Apr 2009

Notations in a personal notebook were not evidence of reprehensible conduct.

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Crim 653

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPalmer, Regina v CACD 6-Dec-2016
The court considered the admission in evidence of social media messages. The defendant had been convicted of the murder of her violent boyfriend, and objected unsuccessfully to the admission of texts which she said were unduly prejudicial.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.468982

Regina v P and others: HL 19 Dec 2000

Where communications had been intercepted in a foreign country, and the manner of such interceptions had been lawful in that country, the evidence produced was admissible in evidence in a trial in England. An admission of such evidence was not an infringement of the rights to a fair trial, nor of the right to respect for private and family life. It did not breach any rule of public policy and was not unfair under section 78. Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough said: ‘the dominant principle guiding the interpretation of the provisions of the [1985] Act was the policy of preserving the secrecy of the surveillance operations to which the Act applied and, to that end, preventing as far as possible any evidence relating to such operations ever reaching the public domain’. The interceptions had been made under the laws of that country, even though one party to the conversation had been in England. The use of an intercept could interfere with article 8.2 rights, but in this case the intercepts had been lawful obtained, and the use sought to be made of it was in accordance with the original purpose, and the intercepts had been kept for no longer than necessary for that purpose. In this case, one of other parties to the conversation was to give evidence, and this must substantially perfect any issue of unfairness. The Act 1985 Act had no application, because the interceptions had not been made under it. That question was to be judged according to the laws of the country which the interception was made.
The defendants appealed against the admission in their trials of telephone intercept evidence obtained lawfully in a foreign country, but including calls to this country. They had been admitted applying Aujla after consideration as to their fairness with section 78 of the 1984 Act.
Held: The appeals were dismissed; ‘The case of Aujla was rightly decided. The decision of the ECHR in Khan shows that the coming into effect of the Human Rights Act does not invalidate in the relevant respects the decision of your Lordships’ House in that case and that s.78 is an appropriate safeguard of the fairness of the trial.’

Judges:

Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough

Citations:

Times 19-Dec-2000, Gazette 22-Feb-2001, [2002] 1 AC 146, [2000] UKHL 69, [2000] UKHL 72, [2001] 2 Cr App R 8, [2001] 2 All ER 58, [2001] 2 WLR 463

Links:

House of Lords, House of Lords, Bailii, Bailii

Statutes:

Interception of Communications Act 1985, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78, Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, European Convention on Human Rights 8 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Preston, Preston, Clarke Etc HL 5-Nov-1993
Telephone tapping evidence consisting of tapping records are to be destroyed after their use for the purpose obtained, but a prosecution was not within that purpose. The underlying purpose of the 1985 Act is to protect information as to the . .
CitedRegina v Khan (Sultan) HL 2-Jul-1996
The police had obtained the evidence against the defendant by fixing a covert listening device at an apartment visited by the defendant, and by recording his conversations there. The defendant appealed, saying that the court should have regard to . .
CitedRegina v Singh and Others CACD 7-Nov-1997
The defendants appealed against a ruling allowing the admissipn in their trial of transcripts of telephone conversations. The results of the interception of a telephone call made abroad and in accordance with law of that country is admissible here. . .
CitedRegina v Preston, Preston, Clarke Etc HL 5-Nov-1993
Telephone tapping evidence consisting of tapping records are to be destroyed after their use for the purpose obtained, but a prosecution was not within that purpose. The underlying purpose of the 1985 Act is to protect information as to the . .
CitedMorgans v Director of Public Prosecutions HL 18-Feb-2000
Without a warrant, the police had arranged for a call logger to retain details of the calls made, including the number called, time and duration. The dialing itself was a communication, which established a connection, through which further . .
CitedMalone v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis (No 2) ChD 28-Feb-1979
The court considered the lawfulness of telephone tapping. The issue arose following a trial in which the prosecution had admitted the interception of the plaintiff’s telephone conversations under a warrant issued by the Secretary of State. The . .
CitedThe Sunday Times (No 1) v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-Apr-1979
Offence must be ;in accordance with law’
The court considered the meaning of the need for an offence to be ‘in accordance with law.’ The applicants did not argue that the expression prescribed by law required legislation in every case, but contended that legislation was required only where . .
CitedThe Sunday Times (No 1) v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-Apr-1979
Offence must be ;in accordance with law’
The court considered the meaning of the need for an offence to be ‘in accordance with law.’ The applicants did not argue that the expression prescribed by law required legislation in every case, but contended that legislation was required only where . .
CitedKlass And Others v Germany ECHR 6-Sep-1978
(Plenary Court) The claimant objected to the disclosure by the police of matters revealed during their investigation, but in this case, it was held, disclosure even after the event ‘might well jeopardise the long-term purpose that originally . .
CitedAmann v Switzerland ECHR 16-Feb-2000
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Violation of Art. 8 with regard to interception of telephone call; Violation of Art. 8 with regard to creation and storing of information card; Preliminary objection . .
CitedKhan v The United Kingdom ECHR 12-May-2000
Evidence was acknowledged to have been obtained unlawfully and in breach of another article of the Convention. The police had installed covert listening devices on private property without the knowledge or consent of the owner. UK national law did . .
CitedSchenk v Switzerland ECHR 12-Jul-1988
The applicant had faced charges of hiring someone to kill his wife. He complained about the use of a recording of his telephone conversation with the man he hired recorded unlawfully by that man.
Held: The ECHR does not address issues about . .
CitedSchenk v Switzerland ECHR 12-Jul-1988
The applicant had faced charges of hiring someone to kill his wife. He complained about the use of a recording of his telephone conversation with the man he hired recorded unlawfully by that man.
Held: The ECHR does not address issues about . .
CitedRegina v Governor of Belmarsh Prison and Another Ex Parte Francis QBD 12-Apr-1995
Justices may not hear evidence from accomplices in extradition proceedings. Also foreign intercept evidence may be used in support of extradition proceedings. Extradition proceedings are not criminal proceedings as such, but may be sui generis. . .
CitedRegina v Rasool, Choudhary CACD 5-Feb-1997
The defendants appealed against convictions for conspiracy to supply a controlled drug. . .
CitedTeixeira De Castro v Portugal ECHR 9-Jun-1998
Mr De Castro had been the target of an unwarranted, unauthorised, unsupervised police operation in which undercover officers incited him to supply drugs. He challenged a conviction for trafficking in heroin, based mainly on statements of two police . .
CitedRegina v Owen; Regina v Stephen CACD 11-Nov-1998
A recorded prisoner’s telephone call from prison was admissible in evidence without the defence having any right to challenge it, where the interceptor established a presumption of consent to the interception because of warnings given to prisoners. . .

Cited by:

CitedW, Regina v (Attorney General’s reference no 5 of 2002) CACD 12-Jun-2003
Three serving police officers provided confidential information to a known criminal. The Chief Constable authorised interception of telephones at a police station, a private network. The court accepted that section 17 prevented the defence asserting . .
CitedAttorney General’s Reference (No 5 of 2002) HL 14-Oct-2004
The Attorney General sought the correct interpretation of section 17 where a court was asked as to whether evidence obtained from a telephone tapping had been taken from a public or private network. A chief constable suspected that the defendants, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence, Human Rights

Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.88580

In Re F (A Minor) (Criminal Proceedings): CA 12 Dec 1994

A father’s defence solicitor was entitled to interview children as witnesses of an alleged assault on the mother.

Citations:

Times 12-Dec-1994, Ind Summary 16-Jan-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Children, Criminal Evidence

Updated: 27 October 2022; Ref: scu.81876

Lockheed-Arabia v Owen: CA 7 Jul 1993

A photocopy of a cheque had been taken. The cheque itself was subsequently stolen. An expert gave evidence on the authenticity of the signature without having seen the original. It was held that statutory provisions were wide enough to allow the judge to give the photocopy the same status as the original for this purpose.

Citations:

Gazette 07-Jul-1993

Statutes:

Criminal Procedure Act 1865 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 26 October 2022; Ref: scu.83146

Regina v Woodward (Terence): CACD 7 Dec 1994

On a prosecution for causing death by dangerous driving, contrary to section 1 of the 1988 Act, the fact that the driver was adversely affected by alcohol was a relevant circumstance in determining whether he was driving dangerously.’The fact (if it be so) that an accused has ingested a large quantity of alcoholic drink is a circumstance within the knowledge of the accused. Accordingly, the statute requires that ‘regard shall be had’ to it.’

Judges:

Lord Taylor CJ

Citations:

Times 07-Dec-1994, [1995] 2 Cr App R 388, [1995] 3 All ER 79, [1995] RTR 130

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v McBride 1961
Evidence that a driver had been drinking was admissible when the driver faced a charge of dangerous driving. . .

Cited by:

CitedPhipps, Regina v CACD 14-Jan-2005
The appellant had been convicted of driving with excess alcohol. After complaints by the injured victim’s family he was further prosecuted for dangerous driving. He now appealed his conviction, having pleaded guilty when the judge failed to find an . .
CitedWebster v Regina CACD 3-Mar-2006
The appellant challenged his conviction for aiding an abetting the causing of death by dangerous driving as a passenger. The driver had been drunk.
Held: The mere intoxication of the driver was not of itself and alone sufficient to establish . .
CitedMilton v Crown Prosecution Service Admn 16-Mar-2007
The defendant appealed his conviction for dangerous driving, saying that his special skills as a trained police driver should have been allowed for. He had driven on a motorway at average speeds of 148mph.
Held: His appeal was allowed. The . .
CitedBannister, Regina v CACD 28-Jul-2009
The defendant appealed his conviction for dangerous driving. As a police officer he had driven at over 110 mph on a motorway in the wet, lost control and crashed. He said that the fact that he had undertaken the police advanced drivers’ course . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence, Road Traffic

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88345

Regina v Wren: CACD 13 Jul 1993

The defendant was accused of indecent assault. He said that the complainant had consented.
Held: It was necessary for the jury to consider whether the appellant might honestly have believed that the complainant was consenting because that was an issue that arose from the facts. The judge has a duty to direct the jury on each issue to be considered by them, and to clear up the slightest doubts about issues before the closing speeches.

Citations:

Times 13-Jul-1993, Ind Summary 09-Aug-1993, [1993] CLR 952

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedH, Regina v CACD 25-Apr-2006
The defendant youth appealed his conviction and sentence for rape by oral penetration of a six or seven year old boy. He complained that the evidence contained such inconsistences that the case should not have proceeded. Complaint was also made that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence, Criminal Practice

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88351

Regina v Skinner: CACD 6 Dec 1993

Witnesses should not rehearse their evidence together before going into court. Farquharson LJ said: ‘It has certainly been permissible, since Lord Goddard’s time, for officers to confer together in the making up of their notebooks immediately after the events or interviews in which they have both been participating, as an aid to memory. That is shown by [Bass].’

Judges:

Farquharson LJ

Citations:

Ind Summary 06-Dec-1993, [1994] 99 CAR 212

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Bass CCA 1953
The court considered how to deal with the admission of a statement where the defendant contested its admissibility. Here the defendant said he had not been cautioned before the interview.
Held: It was within the discretion of the judge to . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Momodou and Limani CACD 2-Feb-2005
The defendants appealed against their convictions and sentence for violent disorder and assault during an uprising at Yarl’s Wood Detention centre. It was said that witnesses had been coached, other defence witnesses had been returned to their . .
CitedSaunders and Tucker, Regina (on the Application of) v The Association of Chief Police Officers and others Admn 10-Oct-2008
The deceased had been shot by police during an armed siege. His family complained that the Independent Police Complaints Commission had declined to order the officers not to confer with each other before making statements.
Held: The authority . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88038

Regina v Smurthwaite; Regina v Gill: CACD 5 Oct 1993

It is not a defence merely to show that there had been entrapment or the use of an agent provocateur, but the Judge has a discretion to exclude the evidence obtained if it would be unfair to use it. The need is to ensure a fair trial.

Citations:

Gazette 13-Oct-1993, Ind Summary 11-Oct-1993, Times 05-Oct-1993, [1994] 98 Cr App R 437

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Mulkerrins and Sansom CACD 20-Jun-1997
The defendant appealed sentences for importing 795 kgs of cocaine, with a street value of approximately pounds 125 million.
Held: There was evidence of others involved at a level even higher than the two appellants, but both appellants had . .
CitedRegina v Shannon (Also Known As Alford) CACD 11-Oct-2000
The defendant had been enticed to commit a crime involving supply of controlled drugs by a journalist acting as an agent provocateur.
Held: Entrapment is not a defence in UK law. It was open to the judge hearing the prosecution to exclude the . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Wood; Director of Public Prosecutions v McGillicuddy Admn 19-Jan-2006
Each defendant sought disclosure of materials concerning the intoximeter instruments, having been charged with driving with excess alcohol. The defendants said that the meters were inaccurate and that the manufacturers were in effect part of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88058

Regina v Taylor-Sabori: CACD 25 Sep 1998

An intercept of a pager message between its transmission from the local land station to the pager was not unlawful. Such communications are not protected by a provision restricting interception of messages emanating from abroad.

Judges:

Henry LJ, Sir Patrick Russell, Beaumont QC J

Citations:

Times 12-Oct-1998, Gazette 14-Oct-1998, [1999] 1 WLR 858, [1998] EWCA Crim 2668

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Interception of Communications Act 1985 10(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.88162

Regina v Pieterson; Regina v H: CACD 8 Nov 1994

The defendants appealed against their convictions for robbery. A dog had been used to follow scents from the scene, picking up items taken in the raid. The defendants objected to admission of evidence of the dog’s activities and reliability.
Held: The appeal failed. Evidence discovered after a trace by a dog might be allowed in, subject to stringent conditions, and evidence as to the dog’s training. Though the supporting evidence here had not met that standard, the deficiency was peripheral. The item found was found within a short distance from the scene of the crime, and had been identified by the victim.
‘In our judgment, if a dog handler can establish that a dog has been properly trained and that over a period of time the dog’s reactions indicate that it is a reliable pointer to the existence of a scent from a particular individual, then that evidence should properly be admitted.
However, it is important to emphasise two safeguards. First, the proper foundation must be laid by detailed evidence establishing the reliability of the dog in question. Secondly, the learned judge must, in giving his directions to the jury, alert them to the care that they need to take and to look with circumspection at the evidence of tracker dogs, having regard to the fact that the dog may not always be reliable and cannot be cross-examined.’

Judges:

LCJ

Citations:

Gazette 11-Jan-1995, Times 11-Nov-1994, [1995] 2 Cr App R 11, 93/6570/Z3, [1994] EWCA Crim 5

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRex v Gibbins and Proctor CCA 1918
Wretched parents were accused of murder after their children starved to death. The court was asked whether they should be tried together: ‘The rule is, that it is a matter for the discretion of the judge at the trial whether two people jointly . .
Not FollowedRex v Trupedo 1920
(South Africa) Evidence concerning the activity of a tracker dog was not admissible. Innes CJ said: ‘We have no scientific or accurate knowledge as to the faculty by which dogs of certain breeds are said to be able to follow the scent of one human . .
CitedRegina v Haas 1962
(Court of Appeal of British Columbia) The court considered the admissibility of evidence derived from a tracker dog: ‘Once the qualifications of a tracking dog to follow a scent and that of his trainer to handle the dog have been established (in the . .
CitedRex v White 1926
(British Colombia) Evidence regarding a tracker dog was held inadmissible. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.87547

Regina v Preston and Others: CACD 17 Jun 1992

Evidence from telephone taps cannot be obtained for prosecution, and were inadmissible in court having been obtained unfairly.

Citations:

Gazette 17-Jun-1992

Statutes:

Interception of Communications Act 1985 9, 2-2-b

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Preston, Preston, Clarke Etc HL 5-Nov-1993
Telephone tapping evidence consisting of tapping records are to be destroyed after their use for the purpose obtained, but a prosecution was not within that purpose. The underlying purpose of the 1985 Act is to protect information as to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.87575

Regina v Nicholson (Andrew Robert): CACD 8 Sep 1999

Where in an assault case, the complainant did not assert that she would be able to identify the defendant, a defendant seeking an identity parade merely for the purpose of establishing what was admitted, could not oblige a parade to be called. The prosecution had proceeded on the basis of other evidence, and placed no reliance upon a general description given by the complainant.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Sep-1999

Statutes:

Police And Criminal Evidence Act 1984 Codes of Practice 1996 D:2.3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.87439

Regina v Morris: CACD 25 Oct 1994

The otherwise unexplained or unexplainable possession of large amounts of cash can be admissible as evidence of drug dealing.

Citations:

Independent 25-Oct-1994, Times 20-Oct-1994, [1995] 2 Cr App R 69

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPayton, Regina v CACD 26-May-2006
The defendant appealed a conviction of possession of 66 grams of cannabis with intent to supply. Also found were a large number of small bags and pounds 7,000 in cash. The defendant said the cannabis was for his personal use, and the equipment had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Sentencing, Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.87390

Regina v Mattey, Regina v Queeley: CACD 13 Oct 1994

The admission of written evidence for the defendant under the section was to be decided on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities.

Citations:

Ind Summary 24-Oct-1994, Times 13-Oct-1994, Gazette 09-Nov-1994

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 23

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.87296

Regina v Hook: CACD 11 Nov 1994

The defendant appealed his conviction for obtaining property by deception. He said the judge should have excluded evidence of allegations of six other similar offences, even though his counsel had not objected at the time.
Held: The judge has a duty himself to challenge evidence if it is clearly not admissible. It would be a misdirection to fail to do so. However that duty did not apply where, as here, there were possibly sustainable arguments for its inclusion. An appeal was not to be used generally to take up points which counsel might have raised at trial.

Judges:

Glidewell LJ, French J, Buckley J

Citations:

Times 11-Nov-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.86880

Regina v Fitzpatrick (Gerald): CACD 19 Feb 1999

The direction to the jury about the value of expert evidence need not be followed slavishly. A jury should know that they were not necessarily bound by an expert’s opinion, but there is no inflexible requirement as to the wording to be used.

Citations:

Times 19-Feb-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Stockwell CA 5-Apr-1993
Expert evidence of facial comparison was admissible if the information and assessment are not otherwise available to the jury. As to Turner: ‘It is to be noted that Lawton LJ there referred to a jury forming their own conclusions ‘without help’. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.86666

Regina v Cain: CACD 1 Nov 1993

Three defendants faced the jury. One with and two without a good character. The criminal convictions of the second were made known by her to the jury. The first defendant now appealed complaining at the way the judge had given his directions.
Held: The appeal failed. Where different defendants had different records each was entitled to the benefit of whatever direction was appropriate to his or her case. Though the judge had failed to give appropriate directions in this case no significant harm had followed.

Citations:

Ind Summary 01-Nov-1993, [1994] 2 All ER 398

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

ConsideredRegina v Vye etc CACD 7-Apr-1993
Detailed guidance was given on good character directions, as to how and when they should be given, but: ‘Provided that the judge indicates to the jury the two respects in which good character may be relevant, ie credibility and propensity, this . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.86264

Regina v Cooke (Stephen): CACD 10 Aug 1994

A sample of hair taken without the suspect’s consent was not an intimate sample, and did not require the associated permissions and procedures. Evidence derived from such a sample was accordingly admissible in evidence.

Citations:

Ind Summary 05-Sep-1994, Times 10-Aug-1994, Gazette 07-Oct-1994

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 65

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.86435

Regina v Owen; R v Stephen: CACD 10 Dec 1998

A recorded prisoner’s telephone call from prison was admissible in evidence without the defence having any right to challenge where the interceptor established a presumption of consent to the interception because of warnings given to prisoners.

Citations:

Gazette 10-Dec-1998

Statutes:

Interception of Communications Act 1985 9

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85439

Regina v Popat (No 2): CACD 2 Sep 1999

The case of R v Popat had not been overruled by R v Forbes, which had been decided unfortunately. The obligation to hold an identity parade was not absolute. There are other factors which can be relied upon to make the obligation indeterminate.

Citations:

Times 02-Sep-1999

Statutes:

Police And Criminal Evidence Act 1984 Codes of Practice 1996 D:2.3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Renewed appealRegina v Popat CACD 23-Mar-1998
Though an identification parade should be held whenever it would serve a useful purpose, where the evidence of identification by a witness was already complete and satisfactory there was no continuing obligation on the police to provide an . .

Cited by:

See alsoRegina v Popat CACD 23-Mar-1998
Though an identification parade should be held whenever it would serve a useful purpose, where the evidence of identification by a witness was already complete and satisfactory there was no continuing obligation on the police to provide an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85446

Regina v Roberts: CACD 14 Sep 1999

Where it became clear during a trial that a witness’ identification of the defendant was based rather on voice than visual memory, counsel for prosecution and defence should have been given opportunity to consider this and make representation, with the trial being stopped if necessary. Research suggests that identification from voice is less reliable even than visual identification.

Citations:

Times 14-Sep-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85463

Regina v Ryan: CACD 13 Oct 1999

There has been some confusion about the need for identity parades to be held where requested by the defendant. Where the witness had properly identified the defendant such a parade need not be held. The decision in R v Popat was to be preferred to that in R v Forbes.

Citations:

Times 13-Oct-1999

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 Codes of Practice

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85468

Regina v K (Corroboration): CACD 16 Jul 1999

The mother had drawn an allegation from her daughter by questioning.
Held: Where a child’s complaint in a sex abuse case may have been elicited by the mother, the court should make clear to the jury the danger of treating the mother’s evidence as corroborative of the child’s, and also as to the danger arising from the susceptibility to suggestion in such a child. The convictions in this case were unsafe.

Judges:

Gage J

Citations:

Times 16-Jul-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85335

Regina v M and Others: CACD 2 Sep 1999

Evidence of the proper background to the offence was normally admissible, even if this revealed previous offences by the defendant, and despite the fact that such offences might not be admissible on a similar fact basis. Where the jury could not obtain a proper understanding of the case without such material it should be admitted. ‘It is apparent that the judgment in Percival was directed to the summing-up in that particular case. We find in the judgment no attempt by the Court to lay down principles of general application in relation to how judges should sum up in cases of delay and we accordingly would wish to discourage the attempts being made, with apparently increasing frequency, in applications and appeals to this Court to rely on Percival as affording some sort of blueprint for summings-up in cases of delay. It affords no such blueprint. Indeed in this area, as in so many others, prescription by this Court as to the precise terms of a summing-up is best avoided. Trial judges should tailor their directions to the circumstances of the particular case. In a case where there have been many years of delay between the alleged offences and trial, a clear warning will usually be desirable as to the impact which this may have had on the memories of witnesses, and as to the difficulties, which may have resulted for the defence. The precise terms of that warning and its relationship to the burden and standard of proof can be left to the good sense of trial judges with appropriate help and guidance from the Judicial Studies Board.’

Judges:

Rose LJ

Citations:

Times 02-Sep-1999, [2000] 1 Crim App R 49

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Pettman CACD 2-May-1985
Background evidence is admissible ‘Where it is necessary to place before the jury evidence of part of a continual background of history relevant to the offence charged in the indictment and without the totality of which the account placed before the . .
CitedRegina v Percival CACD 19-Jun-1998
There was an additional burden on a judge in a case involving very old allegations of sexual abuse to use his imprimatur to emphasise to the jury the additional difficulties faced by a defendant and the high burden of proof. . .

Cited by:

CitedBrizzalari v Regina CACD 19-Feb-2004
Limits to Requests for Adverse Inferences
In closing, prosecuting counsel had suggested that during the trial two matters had been mentioned by the defence which had not been mentioned earlier, and that the jury should feel free to draw proper inferences under the 1984 Act from that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85383

Regina v Nicholson (Andrew Robert): CACD 2 Sep 1999

Where in an assault case, the complainant did not assert that she would be able to identify the defendant, a defendant seeking an identity parade merely for the purpose of establishing what was admitted, could not oblige a parade to be called. The prosecution had proceeded on the basis of other evidence, and placed no reliance upon a general description given by the complainant.

Citations:

Times 02-Sep-1999

Statutes:

Police And Criminal Evidence Act 1984 Codes of Practice 1996 D:2.3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85428

Regina v Byron: CACD 10 Mar 1999

A description of a suspect given by a witness is not itself an identification. Where an identification parade has not been held and therefore there is no admissible identification of the defendant, such evidence of description remains admissible.

Citations:

Times 10-Mar-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85158

Regina v Derodara: CACD 16 Jul 1999

The maker of a statement need not be the person who creates a statement. It may be the person on whose behalf the statements are asserted as true is the maker. Here a police report based on the defendant’s false statements as to the date of a burglary were admitted as evidence in a case alleging a false declaration as part of an obtaining of a pecuniary advantage by deception.

Citations:

Times 16-Jul-1999

Statutes:

Theft Act 1968 16(1) 23 24

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85223

Regina v Doldur: CACD 7 Dec 1999

A jury cannot convict solely on the basis of an inference, drawn under section 34, from the combination of an accused’s failure to give at interview, an explanation relied upon later at court. Additional evidence could be found not only from the prosecution case, but also from the defence. In a section 35 case however, the jury must only draw upon the prosecution case for such a basis.

Citations:

Times 07-Dec-1999, Gazette 08-Dec-1999

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 34 35

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Birchall CACD 20-Jan-1998
The judge had failed in his direction to remind the jury that they had to find a case to answer before drawing any adverse inference from the defendant’s silence at trial
Held: The court must be careful not to omit any elements of the standard . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85238

Regina v Gogana: CACD 12 Jul 1999

Where an appeal was based upon a witness who having once given evidence wished to given evidence to a different effect, it was now clear that full affidavit evidence as to the circumstances in which the new evidence had been obtained and from all involved.

Citations:

Times 12-Jul-1999

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 25 October 2022; Ref: scu.85275

Regina v Land: CACD 10 Oct 1997

No expert medical evidence is needed with regard to the age of a child said to be the subject of an indecent photograph. Whether it is a child is not outside normal experience. The defendant had seen the photographs, and no defence was available under 1(4)(b).

Citations:

Gazette 05-Nov-1997, Times 04-Nov-1997, [1999] QB 65, [1997] EWCA Crim 2409, [1998] 1 Cr App R 301

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Protection of Children Act 1978 1(1)(c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

DistinguishedRegina v Collier CACD 11-Jun-2004
The defendant appealed a conviction of possession of indecent pseudo-photographs of children. He said that he had not seen the image, and that though he had reason to know the images were indecent, he had no reason to know that they were of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.87116

Regina v Morris: CACD 22 Oct 1997

An allegation of assault occasioning bodily harm, where the harm alleged was of a purely psychological nature, must be supported by psychiatric evidence.

Judges:

Potter LJ, Foster, Ebsworth JJ

Citations:

Times 13-Nov-1997, Gazette 12-Nov-1997, [1997] EWCA Crim 2564

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Chan-Fook CACD 15-Nov-1993
‘Actual bodily harm’ under the 1861 Act, may include injury to any part of the body, including internal organs, the nervous system and the brain. It is capable of including psychiatric injury, but not mere emotion such as fear, distress or panic. . .
CitedRegina v Burstow, Regina v Ireland HL 24-Jul-1997
The defendant was accused of assault occasioning actual bodily harm when he had made silent phone calls which were taken as threatening.
Held: An assault might consist of the making of a silent telephone call in circumstances where it causes . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence, Crime

Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.87388

Regina v Hussain, Khan: CACD 20 Jan 1997

The defendants appealed convictions for importing drugs. They chose not to give evidence. At one point, in the presence of the jury, the judge spoke to counsel about warning the defendants of the ‘potential’ inferences, but the defendants had been arraigned before the new rules had come into effect. He acknowledged his mistake, and later addressed the jury in proper terms about the failure to give evidence.
Held: That was sufficient to correct the error.
The defendants had also complained at the admission of evidence derived from telephone intercepts. The court was satisfied that the guidelines had been observed, and additionally that the judge was right to admit the evidence.

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Crim 107

Statutes:

Telecommunication Act 1985, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.149562

Regina v Foxley: CACD 9 Feb 1995

Written statements can be admissible at trial with the protections given by the section without being supported by oral evidence. An inference of the personal knowledge of the maker of statement is permissible.

Citations:

Ind Summary 03-Apr-1995, Times 09-Feb-1995, [1995] 2 Cr App R 523

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 24(1)(ii)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedVehicle and Operator Services Agency v George Jenkins Transport Ltd Admn 20-Nov-2003
The prosecutor Agency appealed by way of case stated against a decision refusing to allow them to admit documentary evidence.
Held: The appeal was dismissed, but the court took the opportunity to say that a case stated did not need as in this . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.88460

Regina v Saunders and Others: CACD 28 Nov 1995

The absence of the protection of a rule against self-incrimination under the company law questioning procedure, didn’t make the use an admission in criminal proceedings unfair. DTI Inspectors may continue their inquiries after it has become clear that offences have been committed provided the caution is given.

Citations:

Independent 28-Nov-1995, Times 28-Nov-1995, Gazette 15-Dec-1995

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.87673

Regina v Rankin: CACD 5 Sep 1995

The Court of Appeal was not to overturn a Judge’s decision with regard to identification evidence in the absence of any lurking doubt. The admission of evidence goes only to fairness within trial, not unreliability.

Citations:

Ind Summary 09-Oct-1995, Times 05-Sep-1995

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence, Criminal Practice

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.87595

Regina v Major Sandhu: CACD 10 Dec 1996

The defendant appealed his conviction and sentence for infringements of the 1990 Act. The house was already very severly dilapidated when it came to be listed. He was accused of making changes outside the extent of the listed buildings consent he had obtained.
Held: The offence was one of strict liability, and guilt did not depend upon any mens rea. However the prosecution had added evidence that the defendant intended to break the regulations. He had complained that this evidence was not intending to prove any necessary part of the offence and was merely prejudicial. The judge’s reasoning was unsound. Evidence which went to prove elements beyond the necessary elements of the offence and which was prejudicial was not admissible.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill LCJ, Sachs, Toulson JJ

Citations:

Times 02-Jan-1997, [1996] EWCA Crim 1677, [1998] 1 PLR 17

Statutes:

Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 7 9, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedEast Riding of Yorkshire Council, Regina (on the Application of) v Hobson Admn 18-Apr-2008
The authority appealed by case stated from the dismissal of its complaints that the defendant had altered a listed building. He had been given permission to carry out certain works, but had in effect demolished and rebuilt the property.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.87670

Regina v Makanjuola: CACD 17 May 1995

Guidance was given on the directions to be given to the jury where a co-accused speaks for prosecution as a witness and in sexual assault cases. The full corroboration warning is not now needed; the Judge may use his own discretion, and may give a lesser direction if he chooses. In this case there was no evidential basis for suggesting that the evidence of the complainant was unreliable.
Lord Taylor LCJ said: ‘(1) it was a matter for the trial judge’s discretion whether or not to give a warning to the jury in respect of the unsupported evidence of [a] complainant in a sexual case. The nature of the warning and whether or not to give it would depend upon the circumstances of the case, the issues raised and the content and quality of the witness’s evidence. (2) There would need to be an evidential basis for suggesting that the evidence of the witness was unreliable, which did not include mere suggestions by cross-examining counsel. (3) If the question arose whether a special warning should be given, it was desirable that the question be resolved by discussion with counsel in the jury’s absence before final speeches . . (5) Where some warning is required, it will be for the judge to decide the strength and terms of the warning; it does not have to be invested with the whole florid regime of the old corroboration rules. (6) The court will only interfere with the judge’s exercise of his discretion if it is unreasonable in the Wednesbury sense.’ As to retrospectivity ‘The general rule against the retrospective operation of statutes does not apply to procedural provisions . . . Indeed the general presumption is that a statutory change in procedure applies to pending as well as future proceedings.’

Judges:

Lord Taylor LCJ

Citations:

Gazette 07-Jun-1995, Independent 06-Jun-1995, Times 17-May-1995, (1995) 2 Cr App R 469, [1995] 1 WLR 1348, [1995] 3 All ER 730

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 32

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Warner CACD 17-Feb-1997
The defendant appealed convictions for indecent assault, saying that convictions on some counts and acquittals on others were so inconsistent as to call the convictions into question, showing acceptance of the complainant’s evidence on some counts . .
CitedRegina v Gellatly, JR CACD 22-Jul-1997
The defendant appealed against convictions for rape, attempted rape and indecent assault against the daughters of his partner. The allegations were that serious sexual assaults had been repeated over several years. The defendant denied them . .
CitedRegina v B CACD 15-May-1997
The Court upheld a conviction in respect of an Appellant who had been convicted of three offences on a six-count indictment. He was acquitted of the other three. In respect of each of the six counts the Prosecution relied upon the uncorroborated . .
CitedBradley, Regina v CACD 14-Jan-2005
The defendant complained that his criminal record had been placed before the jury under the Act, even though the proceedings had been begun before the commencement date.
Held: The provisions of the Act were procedural in nature and therefore . .
CitedRegina v Doheny, Adams CACD 31-Jul-1996
The court set out the procedure for the introduction of DNA evidence in criminal trials. In particular the court explained the ‘Prosecutor’s Fallacy’ when using statistical evidence. The significance of the DNA evidence will depend critically upon . .
CitedClibery, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department Admn 30-Jul-2007
The claimant sought judicial review of a decision of the Home Secretary, to refuse his application for compensation. He had first been convicted and imprisoned and then had his conviction quashed. The respondent did not think that the conviction was . .
CitedMisick, Regina (on the Application of) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Admn 1-May-2009
The former premier of the Turks and Caicos Islands sought to challenge the constitutionality of the 2009 order which was to allow suspension of parts of the Constitution and imposing a direct administration, on a final report on alleged corruption. . .
CitedRegina v Cairns; Regina v Zaldi, Regina v Chaudary CACD 22-Nov-2002
The defendants applied for the defence statements of co-defendants to be disclosed. A co-defendant was to give evidence for the Crown, and they sought to have it excluded as unreliable.
Held: The 1996 Act created a duty of secondary . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence, Criminal Practice

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.87247

Regina v Lockley; Regina v Corah: CACD 15 Jun 1995

On a retrial, evidence from a transcript of the first trial is admissible. The alleged confession to a cell mate who boasted of deceptiveness is to be supported in court.

Citations:

Independent 15-Jun-1995, Times 27-Jun-1995

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 23 24

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.87207

Regina v H (Evidence: Corroboration); Regina v Hepburn: CACD 2 Mar 1994

The defendant appealed his conviction for indecent assault on his daughter and stepdaughter. The prosecution relied upon the allegatins as similar fact evidence. The complainants denied collaboration and concoction.
Held: The jury should decide first if the complainants have colluded before being asked to assess whether their accounts were corroboration for each other. Nevertheless the appeal failed. The assessment of the reliability of the witnesses, was essentially one for the jury not the judge, and he had been correct to leave the question to the jury.

Citations:

Gazette 30-Mar-1994, Times 02-Mar-1994, Independent 25-Feb-1994, [1994] 1 WLR 809

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

FollowedRegina v Johanssen CACD 1978
. .
Not FollowedRegina v Ananthanarayanan CACD 11-Mar-1993
The defendant appealed against his conviction for indecent assault. He complained that the judge had in effect left to the jury the question of whether the evidence of the two accusers was contaminated.
Held: His appeal succeeded. It was for . .
FollowedDirector of Public Prosecutions v Hester CACD 1972
. .

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v H (Evidence: Corroboration) HL 25-May-1995
The fact that there may have been a possibility of collusion is not sufficient to stop the admission of similar fact evidence by way of corroboration. ‘ . . the function of the trial judge is not to decide as an intellectual process whether the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.86784

Regina v Dragic: CACD 7 Mar 1996

Written evidence of a severely and chronically ill witness who was unable to attend and give oral evidence was rightly admitted. Lord Taylor CJ said: ‘The fact that there is no ability to cross-examine, that the witness who is absent is the only evidence against the accused and that his evidence is identification evidence is not sufficient to render the admission of written evidence from that witness contrary to the interests of justice or unfair to the defendant per se. What matters in our judgment, is the content of the statement and the circumstances of the particular case.’

Judges:

Lord Taylor CJ

Citations:

Times 07-Mar-1996, (1996) 2 CAR 232

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Davis (Iain); Regina v Ellis, Regina v Gregory, Regina v Simms, Regina v Martin CACD 19-May-2006
The several defendants complained at the use at their trials of evidence given anonymously. The perceived need for anonymity arose because, from intimidation, the witnesses would not be willing to give their evidence without it.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.86581

Regina v E (Sexual Abuse: Delay): CACD 6 Jul 1995

There are no fixed rules for the form of or need for warnings to be given as regards the prejudice to a defendant in sex abuse cases where there has been a long delay after the events complained of. It was a matter for the judge in each case.

Citations:

Ind Summary 31-Jul-1995, Gazette 19-Jul-1995, Times 06-Jul-1995

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.86601

Regina v Clare, Regina v Peach: CACD 7 Apr 1995

A Police Constable’s very detailed analysis of video evidence in a case made him an ad hoc expert on it.
Lord Taylor of Gosforth CJ said: ‘The phrase ‘expert ad hoc’ seeks to put witnesses like Detective Parsons and PC Fitzpatrick into the traditional category of those qualified to give expert opinion. Whether or not the tag is appropriate, we are clearly of the view that PC Fitzpatrick had ‘special knowledge that the Court did not possess’ . . PC Fitzpatrick had acquired the knowledge by lengthy and studious application to material which was itself admissible evidence. To afford the jury the time and facilities to conduct the same research would be utterly impracticable. Accordingly, it was in our judgment legitimate to allow the officer to assist the jury by pointing to what he asserted was happening in the crowded scenes on the film. He was open to cross-examination, and the jury, after proper direction and warnings, were free either to accept or reject his assertions.’

Judges:

Lord Taylor of Gosforth CJ

Citations:

Independent 07-Apr-1995, Times 07-Apr-1995, Gazette 03-May-1995, [1995] 2 Cr App R 333

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedAttorney General’s Reference (No 2 of 2002) CACD 7-Oct-2002
The defendants had been seen on video. The prosecution sought to admit, in addition to the video evidence itself, evidence from police officers as to the identity of persons claimed to be shown on the tape. The officers evidence was offered but not . .
CitedPhipps v The Director of Public Prosecutions and Another PC 27-Jun-2012
phipps_dppPC2012
(Jamaica) The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder. He complained that he had been prejudiced because the jury were told that he had been produced from custody, and one of his witnesses was produced in court in chains, thus . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.86386

Regina v Clarke: CACD 30 Jan 1995

There were no special rules for the admission of evidence by computerised facial mapping. The ultimate gatekeepers on the admission of evidence of previous convictions are the rules on similar fact evidence.

Citations:

Ind Summary 30-Jan-1995, [1995] 2 Cr App R 420

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Hersey CACD 1-Dec-1997
The defendant appealed against his conviction for robbery, which had been based in part on witnesses identifying his voice. Particular concern was raised where a series of recordings had been brought together from which the witness had been asked to . .
CitedRegina v Shanks CACD 19-Mar-2003
The appellant appealed his conviction for murder. He had shot his lover as she walked away from an argument. The fact of his conviction following mention of a guilty plea to possession of the firearm was complained of.
Held: The judge had . .
CitedAtkins and Another v Regina CACD 2-Oct-2009
The court considered the use in evidence of facial photograph comparison techniques. The expert had given an opinion that the comparison gave support to a conclusion that the photograph in issue was of the defendant, but there was no database . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.86392

Regina v Adams: CACD 26 Apr 1996

The defendant appealed against his conviction for rape. There had been a DNA match, but the defendant did not match the description given by the victim, and she had not picked him out. He argued that DNA evidence alone should not be used to convict, and that the judge had misdirected the jury as to the use of statistical evidence. The court considered how DNA evidence might be presented to a jury.
Held: The appeal was allowed, and a decision was to follow as to a retrial.
The use of statistical theory in support of a case is to be discouraged in criminal trials: ‘To introduce Bayes Theorem, or any similar method, into a criminal trial plunges the Jury into inappropriate and unnecessary realms of theory and complexity deflecting them from their proper task.’
The court considered the error of seeking to use probability in a criminal court. Rose LJ said: ‘More fundamentally, however, the attempt to determine guilt or innocence on the basis of a mathematical formula, applied to each separate piece of evidence, is simply inappropriate to the jury’s task. Jurors evaluate evidence and reach a conclusion not by means of a formula, mathematical or otherwise, but by the joint application of their individual common sense and knowledge of the world to the evidence before them. It is common for them to have to evaluate scientific evidence, both as to its quality and as to its relationship with other evidence. Scientific evidence tendered as proof of a particular fact may establish that fact to an extent which, in any particular case, may vary between slight possibility and virtual certainty. For example, different blood spots on an accused’s clothing may, on testing, reveal a range of conclusions from ‘human blood’ via ‘possibly the victim’s blood’ to ‘highly likely to be the victim’s blood’. Such evidence is susceptible to challenge as to methodology and otherwise, which may weaken or even, in some cases, strengthen the impact of the evidence. But we have never heard it suggested that a jury should consider the relationship between such scientific evidence and other evidence by reference to probability formulas. That such a course would in any event be impossible of sensible achievement by a jury, at least so far as the use of the Bayes theorem is concerned, is demonstrated by the practical application of the stage of that theorem’s methodology that involves numerical assessment of the various items of evidence. Individual jurors might differ greatly not only according to how cogent they found a particular piece of evidence (which would be a matter for discussion and debate between the jury as a whole), but also on the question of what percentage figure for probability should be placed on that evidence. Since, as we have pointed out, the translation of an assessment of cogency into a percentage probability of guilt is entirely a matter of judgment and the conferring of a percentage probability of guilt upon one item of evidence taken in isolation is an essentially artificial operation, different jurors might well wish to select different numerical figures even when they were broadly agreed on the weight of the evidence in question. They could, presumably, only resolve any such difference by taking an average, which would truly reflect neither party’s view; and this point leaves aside the even greater difficulty of how twelve jurors, applying Bayes as a single jury, are to reconcile, under the mathematics of that formula, differing individual views about the cogency of particular pieces of evidence. ‘

Judges:

Rose, Hidden, Buxton LJJ

Citations:

Times 09-May-1996, [1996] EWCA Crim 222, [1996] 2 Cr App R 467, [1996] Crim LR 898, [1996] 2 Cr App Rep 467

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Doheny, Adams CACD 31-Jul-1996
The court set out the procedure for the introduction of DNA evidence in criminal trials. In particular the court explained the ‘Prosecutor’s Fallacy’ when using statistical evidence. The significance of the DNA evidence will depend critically upon . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.86032

Regina v B (Evidence: Propensity): CACD 27 Jan 1997

The defendant appealed his conviction for indecent assaults, denying that any assaults had taken place. He complained that the judge had allowed questioning about his sexual propensities.
Held: Propensity to acts is not admissible as evidence supporting charge of doing them.

Judges:

Rose LJ, Dyson J Timothy Walker J

Citations:

Times 19-Feb-1997, [1997] EWCA Crim 207

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Wright and Ormerod CACD 1990
The defendants were charged with indecent assault on a child of 5, who said that the defendants had hurt her in the back and said naughty things to her. The Judge also admitted evidence from the child’s mother of the complaint the child had made to . .
CitedRegina v A S CACD 20-Jan-1997
The defendant appealed against convictions for several sexual offences. The alleged victim had originally denied that any offending had taken place. The defendant denied that anything had happened. He complained now that the court had accepted in . .
CitedDirector of Public Prosecutions v P HL 1991
The defendant faced specimen counts of rape and incest against each of his two daughters. The trial judge refused an application for separate trials in respect of the offences alleged against each daughter. The defendant was convicted.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.86079

Regina v Bailey: CACD 26 Jan 1995

A confession made by a mentally handicapped person to a non-independent witness should only be admitted into evidence after a proper warning was agreed to be given to the jury.

Citations:

Times 26-Jan-1995

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 77

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Practice, Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.86084

Regina v Barnes (Anthony): CACD 6 Jul 1995

Identification evidence from separate complainants was properly to be accumulated together if one offender was known in sexual assault cases if one person was claimed to be responsible for all the attacks, and the jury was satisfied that it was a series of assaults.

Citations:

Gazette 31-Aug-1995, Ind Summary 14-Aug-1995, Times 06-Jul-1995, [1995] 2 Cr App R 491

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Brown, Wilson, Mcmillan and McClean CACD 31-Jul-1996
Identification on one set of offences was said to be less than sufficient on its own to secure a conviction. Further identification evidence bound the defendants to a related offence. The judge brought them together, and the defence appealed saying . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.86094

Regina v Acott: CACD 5 Apr 1996

To decide whether a judge’s duty under section 3 was triggered it was essential to bear in mind that the word ‘provocation’ was used in an active and not a passive sense. Provocation was that which provoked; it was not the state of being in a temper as a result of provocation. It is incumbent on the defence to at least raise some evidence of provocation before the trial judge is obliged to deal with this issue in his summing up.

Judges:

Lord Justice Hirst, Mr Justice Rougier and Mr Justice Mitchell

Citations:

Times 05-Apr-1996, [1997] 2 Cr App R 94

Statutes:

Homicide Act 1957 3

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Acott HL 12-Mar-1997
Provocation is not an issue in murder until evidence is given which takes the issues beyond a mere refuted cross examination. If there was ‘insufficient material for a jury to find that it is a reasonable possibility that there was specific . .
CitedVan Dongen and Another, Regina v CACD 5-Jul-2005
The defendant brothers appealed convictions for murder. They had pleaded self defence. The injuries on the deceased suggested a substantial number of wounds were inflicted when he was in a curled up defensive post.
Held: The provocation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.86031

Regina v Z (Prior Acquittal): CACD 14 Dec 1999

Where a defendant has previously been acquitted of an offence, the prosecution was not merely prevented from issuing a complaint based upon the same facts, but also was not able to present the facts alleged before a later court as evidence of similar fact. The prosecution was not able to selectively interpret the verdicts of juries in earlier cases.

Citations:

Times 14-Dec-1999, Gazette 07-Jan-2000

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Z (Prior acquittal) HL 22-Jun-2000
The defendant on a charge of rape had been tried and acquitted of the rape of different women on three previous occasions in three separate trials. The prosecution wished to call those three complainants to give similar fact evidence in support of . .

Cited by:

Appeal fromRegina v Z (Prior acquittal) HL 22-Jun-2000
The defendant on a charge of rape had been tried and acquitted of the rape of different women on three previous occasions in three separate trials. The prosecution wished to call those three complainants to give similar fact evidence in support of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 05 October 2022; Ref: scu.85622

Chan Wei Keung v The Queen: PC 7 Nov 1966

(Hong Kong) The defendant appealed from his conviction for murder. He complained as to the adequacy of the judge’s directions to the jury.
Held: On a voir dire as to the admissibility of a defendant’s challenged statement, the prosecution should not ask questions in cross-examination of the defendant with the object of establishing the truth of the statement. When a statement is ruled inadmissible as contrary to the common law rule, evidence of what was said during the voir dire is inadmissible. Counsel for the defendant must have the opportunity to air the circumstances around the making of the statement before the jury.

Judges:

Hodson, Pearce, Pearson LL

Citations:

[1967] 2 AC 160, [1966] UKPC 25, (1967) 51 Cr App R 257, [1967] 1 All ER 948, [1967] 2 WLR 552, (1967) 51 Cr App Rep 257

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Mushtaq HL 21-Apr-2005
The defendant was convicted of fraud charges. He sought to have excluded statements made in interview on the basis that they had been obtained by oppressive behaviour by the police. His wife was very seriously ill in hospital and he had made the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445111

Mawaz Khan Alias Fazal Karim and Amanat Khan v The Queen: PC 7 Nov 1966

(Hong Kong) The defendants appealed from their convictions for murder complaining of the admission in evidence against each other of statements made in the absence of the other, saying that this amounted to hearsay.

Citations:

[1966] UKPC 26, [1967] 1 AC 454, [1967] 1 All ER 80, [1966] 3 WLR 1275

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.445112

Regina v Cambridge: CACD 2 Aug 2011

Judges:

Laws LJ,Openshaw, Hickinbottom JJ

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Crim 2009

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Boardman HL 1974
The defendant appealed the admission of similar fact evidence against him. Acts of buggery were alleged by a schoolmaster with boys in which the accused was the passive partner.
Held: In order to be admissible similar facts must bear a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 20 September 2022; Ref: scu.444839

Regina v Forbes (Anthony Leroy) (Attorney General’s Reference No 3 of 1999): HL 19 Dec 2000

The provisions of the Code of Practice regarding identification parades are mandatory and additional unwritten conditions are not to be inserted. Where there was an identification and the suspect challenged that identification, and consented to the parade, the parade must be held. There is nothing in the words of code of practice to allow police officers not to hold an identification parades where the identification was considered to be already completed. There is nothing in the code to justify a distinction as to quality of identification evidence between that of a police officer and of a member of the public. In the past, identification which had received complete and unequivocal acceptance had proved to be the source of miscarriages of justice. Once a breach of the Codes was found, the trial judge must deal with this in his summing up in words which were appropriate to the situation. Nevertheless, in this case there had been a prior unequivocal identification. Lord Bingham of Cornhill: ‘If an eye-witness of a criminal incident makes plain to the police that he cannot identify the culprit, it will very probably be futile to invite that witness to attend an identification parade. If an eye-witness may be able to identify clothing worn by a culprit but not the culprit himself, it will probably be futile to mount an identification parade rather than simply inviting the witness to identify the clothing. If a case is one of pure recognition of someone well-known to the eye-witness, it may again be futile to hold an identification parade. But save in cases such as these, or other exceptional circumstances, the effect of paragraph 2.3 is clear: if (a) the police have sufficient information to justify the arrest of a particular person for suspected involvement in an offence, and (b) an eye-witness has identified or may be able to identify that person, and (c) the suspect disputes his identification as a person involved in the commission of that offence, an identification parade must be held if (d) the suspect consents and (e) paragraphs 2.4, 2.7 and 2.10 of Code D do not apply.’

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill

Citations:

Times 19-Dec-2000, Gazette 22-Feb-2001, [2000] UKHL 66, [2000] 1 CAR 430 (HL), [2001] 1 AC 473, [2001] 1 Crim App R 430, [2001] 2 WLR 1, [2001] 1 All ER 686

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal fromRegina v B (Attorney-General’s Reference No 3 of 1999); Regina v Weir CACD 26-May-2000
Where a defendant gave a sample of DNA during an investigation, but the sample was not destroyed on his acquittal, evidence obtained from a cross match relating to a different crime was not admissible. The statute requires the samples to be . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v Charles CACD 19-Jul-2001
The defendants appealed convictions for robbery, disputing the admission of police and identification evidence. There had been several failures to comply with the codes of practice, including the failure to hold an identity parade when so requested, . .
CitedS, Regina (on Application of) v South Yorkshire Police; Regina v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police ex parte Marper HL 22-Jul-2004
Police Retention of Suspects DNA and Fingerprints
The claimants complained that their fingerprints and DNA records taken on arrest had been retained after discharge before trial, saying the retention of the samples infringed their right to private life.
Held: The parts of DNA used for testing . .
AppliedMcKenna v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 8-Apr-2005
The defendant appealed a conviction for driving whilst disqualified. He said that an officer’s identification of him should have been excluded from evidence because no identification parade had been held.
Held: A parade should have been held: . .
CitedRegina v Davis (Iain); Regina v Ellis, Regina v Gregory, Regina v Simms, Regina v Martin CACD 19-May-2006
The several defendants complained at the use at their trials of evidence given anonymously. The perceived need for anonymity arose because, from intimidation, the witnesses would not be willing to give their evidence without it.
Held: The . .
CitedDowsett v Criminal Cases Review Commission Admn 8-Jun-2007
The claimant had been convicted in 1993 of involvement in a murder. He had complained that the police had failed to disclose material which would have been of assistance to him. He had requested the Commission to take examine and pursue his appeal. . .
CitedAttorney General’s Reference No 3 of 1999: Application By the British Broadcasting Corporation To Set Aside or Vary a Reporting Restriction Order HL 17-Jun-2009
An application was made to discharge an anonymity order made in previous criminal proceedings before the House. The defendant was to be retried for rape under the 2003 Act, after an earlier acquittal. The applicant questioned whether such a order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Police, Criminal Evidence

Updated: 13 September 2022; Ref: scu.88458

Regina v Becouarn: HL 28 Jul 2005

At his trial for murder, the defendant had not given evidence, and the court had allowed the jury to draw proper inferences under s35.
Held: The JSB direction ‘on drawing inferences [i]s sufficiently fair to defendants, emphasising as it does that the jury must conclude that the only sensible explanation of his failure to give evidence is that he has no answer to the case against him, or none that could have stood up to cross-examination.’ The court retains an overriding discretion in any particular case to decline to allow previous convictions to be put or inferences to be drawn if he thinks it unfair.

Judges:

Steyn, Hoffmann, Hope of Craighead, Scott of Foscoe, Carswell LL

Citations:

[2005] UKHL 55, Times 01-Aug-2005

Links:

Bailii, House of Lords

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 35

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRex v Butterwasser 1948
If a defendant put his character in issue by attacking the character of the prosecution witnesses, but did not himself give evidence, he would escape the consequences of having his convictions put in evidence. . .
CitedRegina v Taylor CACD 1999
The appellant, who had previous convictions, did not give evidence, and the trial judge gave a direction in accordance with section 35.
Held: The Court rejected a submission by the appellant’s counsel that the judge should have not have told . .
CitedRegina v Bowers, Taylor, Millan CACD 13-Mar-1998
Bowers and Millan complained that the direction given under section 34 was impermissible. The ground of complaint was that they had not relied on any fact by way of defence, but had simply put the prosecution to proof.
Held: The court asked . .
CitedRegina v Cowan and Another CACD 12-Oct-1995
Detailed directions were provided for the judge to give to a jury where a defendant chooses not to give evidence in his defence in the Crown Court.
Lord Taylor of Gosforth said: ‘1. The judge will have told the jury that the burden of proof . .
CitedRegina v Lucas (Ruth) CACD 1981
People sometimes tell lies for reasons other than a belief that they are necessary to conceal guilt.
Four conditions were identified which must be satisfied before a defendant’s lie could be seen as supporting the prosecution case:-
(1) . .
CitedRegina v Selvey HL 1970
A defendant was not to be asked about any previous convictions, unless he had ‘lost his shield’ and incurred liability to such cross-examination by putting his own character in issue, either by putting questions or giving evidence with a view to . .
CitedRegina v Bathurst CACD 1968
The judge was bound to direct the jury that a defendant was fully entitled to sit back and see if the prosecution had proved its case, and that they must not make any assumption of guilt from the fact that he had not gone into the witness box. . .
CitedRegina v Napper CACD 1995
The operation of section 35 is not to be reduced or marginalised. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 24 August 2022; Ref: scu.229070

Regina v Watts: CACD 23 Jul 2010

The defendant, with no previous convictions appealed against conviction for sexual assaults on vulnerable women at the care home at which he worked. He said that the evidence was so weak that it should not have been left for the jury. Special procedures under the 1999 Act had been used for the complainants to give evidence.

Judges:

Mackay J, Lord Judge LCJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Crim 1824

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Sexual Offences Act 2003 42(5), Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 16

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 21 August 2022; Ref: scu.421081

Regina v H Regina v W Regina v M: CACD 6 Jul 2001

The witness had given three statements to police officers. Some time before the trial, the defendant was released, and the witness gave a further statement declining to give evidence on the basis that he was frightened for himself and his family of reprisals. By the time of the trial, it had been three months since he had been seen. The trial judge admitted the written statements. On appeal the defendants argued that they should not have been admitted without evidence as to the state of the witness’ mind at the date of the trial. The appeal court agreed. What mattered was not the historical state of fear, but its presence or absence at the date of the trial. Each case was to be approached according to its own circumstances. Officers should give evidence as to the efforts made to persuade the witness to attend. Consideration should also be given to the use of video links and other ways of ameliorating the fear.

Citations:

Times 06-Jul-2001

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 23 26

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 03 August 2022; Ref: scu.88489

Regina v Hardwick: CACD 28 Feb 2001

The judge has a discretion as to the admission of the written statement made by a witness who had died before trial.
Held: The circumstances must vary, according not least to the nature of the issue on which the deceased’s evidence was required. Simple rules could not always apply, but sufficient and proper warning should be given to the jury about the dangers of relying upon untested evidence. In this case no issue arose as to alibi or identification or intimidation.

Citations:

Times 28-Feb-2001, [2001] EWCA Crim 369, [2001] 3 Archbold News 2

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 1988 23

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedLobban, Regina v CACD 7-May-2004
The defendant appealed his conviction. A witness statement had been read, but he had wanted to cross examine her. The court was satisfied that her refusal to give evidence in person was through fear.
Held: In making the decision, the judge had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 21 July 2022; Ref: scu.88492

Malone v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis (No 2): ChD 28 Feb 1979

The court considered the lawfulness of telephone tapping. The issue arose following a trial in which the prosecution had admitted the interception of the plaintiff’s telephone conversations under a warrant issued by the Secretary of State. The plaintiff claimed that the interception had been and was unlawful.
Held: Although he dismissed the plaintiff’s claim, the Vice Chancellor said ‘Any regulation of so complex a matter as telephone tapping is essentially a matter for Parliament, not the courts . . this case seems to me to make it plain that telephone tapping is a subject which cries out for legislation.’
‘I am not unduly troubled by the absence of English authority: there has to be a first time for everything, and if the principles of English law, and not least analogies from the existing rules, together with the requirements of justice and common sense, pointed firmly to such a right existing, then I think the court should not be deterred from recognising the right. On the other hand, it is no function of the courts to legislate in a new field. The extension of the existing laws and principles is one thing, the creation of an altogether new right is another.’
‘I readily accept that if the question before me were one of construing a statute enacted with the purpose of giving effect to obligations imposed by the Convention, the court would readily seek to construe the legislation in a way that would effectuate the Convention rather than frustrate it. However, no relevant legislation of that sort is in existence. It seems to me that where Parliament has abstained from legislating on a point that is plainly suitable for legislation, it is indeed difficult for the court to lay down new rules of common law or equity that will carry out the Crown’s treaty obligations, or to discover for the first time that such rules have always existed.’

Judges:

Sir Robert Megarry VC

Citations:

[1979] CLY 2098, [1979] 1 Ch 344, [1980] QB 49, [1979] 2 All ER 620, [1979] EWHC 2 (Ch)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedBonalumi v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 1985
In the course of extradition proceedings, an order was obtained under the 1879 Act. The defendant sought to appeal against the order, and applied to the Court of Appeal.
Held: The procedure under the 1879 Act was in the course of criminal . .
CitedW, Regina v (Attorney General’s reference no 5 of 2002) CACD 12-Jun-2003
Three serving police officers provided confidential information to a known criminal. The Chief Constable authorised interception of telephones at a police station, a private network. The court accepted that section 17 prevented the defence asserting . .
Appeal fromMalone v The United Kingdom ECHR 2-Aug-1984
COURT (PLENARY) The complainant asserted that his telephone conversation had been tapped on the authority of a warrant signed by the Secretary of State, but that there was no system to supervise such warrants, and that it was not therefore in . .
CitedWainwright and another v Home Office HL 16-Oct-2003
The claimant and her son sought to visit her other son in Leeds Prison. He was suspected of involvement in drugs, and therefore she was subjected to strip searches. There was no statutory support for the search. The son’s penis had been touched . .
CitedCostello v Chief Constable of Derbyshire Constabulary CA 22-Mar-2001
The police seized a car from Mr Costello, believing that it was stolen. The seizure was lawful at the time, by virtue of section 19 of PACE. The police never brought any criminal proceedings against Mr Costello, but they refused to return the car to . .
CitedTillery Valley Foods v Channel Four Television, Shine Limited ChD 18-May-2004
The claimant sought an injunction to restrain the defendants broadcasting a film, claiming that it contained confidential material. A journalist working undercover sought to reveal what he said were unhealthy practices in the claimant’s meat . .
CitedRegina v P and others HL 19-Dec-2000
Where communications had been intercepted in a foreign country, and the manner of such interceptions had been lawful in that country, the evidence produced was admissible in evidence in a trial in England. An admission of such evidence was not an . .
See AlsoMalone v The United Kingdom ECHR 26-Apr-1985
Hudoc Judgment (Just satisfaction) Struck out of the list (friendly settlement) . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Police, Criminal Evidence

Updated: 19 July 2022; Ref: scu.183549

Regina v Christou; Regina v Wright: CACD 8 Jul 1992

Evidence which had been obtained by a police trick (false shop) was admissible. It’s use was not unfair. Lord Taylor CJ said that the defendants ‘voluntarily applied themselves to the trick’.
When assessing impact the court should assume that the jury was faithful to the directions of law.

Judges:

Lord Taylor CJ

Citations:

Gazette 08-Jul-1992, [1992] 1 QB 979, [1996] 2 Cr App R 360

Statutes:

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 78

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPalmer and Others v Regina CACD 7-Aug-2014
Three defendants appealed against convictions for selling stolen goods, saying that the police had used entrapment. The officers had established a shop at which thieves might expect to sell goods. Each defendant had pleaed guilty after a ruling . .
CitedS and Others v Regina CACD 28-Jun-2012
Four defendants appealed against convictions for child sex abuse. The convictions had taken place at a time when current guidance to examining physicians did not apply. In each case the defendants consented to new evidence from the prosecution.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.86379

Flynn and Another, Regina v: CACD 2 May 2008

The court considered the practice of identification by voice recognition, giving detailed guidance on its acceptance and use.

Judges:

Gage LJ, Hedley J, Sir Christopher Holland

Citations:

[2008] 2 Cr App R 20, [2008] EWCA Crim 970

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

CitedPhipps v The Director of Public Prosecutions and Another PC 27-Jun-2012
phipps_dppPC2012
(Jamaica) The defendant appealed against his conviction for murder. He complained that he had been prejudiced because the jury were told that he had been produced from custody, and one of his witnesses was produced in court in chains, thus . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.269919

RL v Regina (Evidence of wife): CACD 7 May 2008

The defendant appealed against his conviction for sexual assault on his daughter. Whilst he was in custody, the police approached his wife and took a statement from her which was used in evidence. The defendant complained that since they had not warned her that she was not compellable as a witness, the statement should not be admitted. She had refused to give evidence in court.
Held: The appeal failed. The written statement had been properly admitted. The situation was quite different from a caution which was to respect a defendant’s basic right not to be required to incriminate himself, and nor was admitting somebody else’s record of a voluntary statement the same as compelling her to give evidence. That was not to say that the practice would always be unobjectionable. The court distinguished between compelling a wife to give evidence and permitting another witness to give evidence of a voluntary statement made by the wife in the past. Section 80 did not act as a bar to the production of the wife’s statement provided that the hearsay passed the interests of justice test set out in section 114(2).

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, LCJ, Bean, Wilkie JJ

Citations:

[2008] EWCA Crim 973, Times 14-May-2008, (2008) 2 Cr App R18, [2008] Crim LR 823, [2009] 1 WLR 626

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice Act 2003 113, Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 80

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedHoskyn v Metropolitan Police Commissioner HL 1978
The defendant had married the complainant only two days before he was to face trial for assaulting her. The House considered whether she was compellable as a witness against him as his wife.
Held: A spouse ought not to have been compelled to . .

Cited by:

CitedRegina v EED CACD 28-May-2010
A witness had been warned to attend court, but had not served with an order and did not attend. The defendant appealed against his conviction saying that her evidence should not have been read to the jury. He had faced allegations of sexual abuse of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 17 July 2022; Ref: scu.269926