PRACTICE DIRECTION (CA CRIM DIV: CRIMINAL PRACTICE DIRECTIONS 2015: AMENDMENT NO.8) (2019)

A Practice Direction was issued amending Practice Direction (CA (Crim Div): Criminal Proceedings: General Matters) [2015] EWCA Crim 1567. New sections were inserted or amendments were made to paragraphs concerning the overriding objective, trials in absence, expert evidence, identification for the court of issues in the case, trial adjournment in magistrates’ courts, trial adjournment in […]

Read More

R v QD (2019)

A conviction for sexual assault was safe, even though a central piece of evidence for the prosecution was the hearsay statement of the two-and-a-half-year-old victim. The statement had properly been admitted under the Criminal Justice (Evidence) (Northern Ireland) Order 2004 art.18(1)(d) and the judge had given appropriate directions to the jury about how it was […]

Read More

R v GARETH WILLIAM JONES (2018)

The conviction of a vulnerable adult with a severe learning disability for the offence of sexual activity by a care worker with a person with a mental disability was unsafe, and was accordingly quashed, where inadequate consideration had been given to his learning disability in the course of the trial. Fresh psychological evidence demonstrated that […]

Read More

R v BC (2018)

The court upheld an offender’s convictions for indecent assault and attempting to inflict grievous bodily harm committed against his younger brother when they were both under 18. It could not be said that the manner in which the trial was conducted by the offender’s own counsel was so flawed as to render his conviction unsafe.

Read More

R v E (2018)

A judge’s decision to stay a prosecution as an abuse of process on the basis of a failure by the prosecution to properly pursue a line of enquiry when investigating allegations of sexual assault was wrong in principle and did not constitute a reasonable exercise of his discretion.

Read More

R v DARREN SIMMONS (2018)

Convictions for sexual offences were safe despite the fact that material about the complainant had not been disclosed to the defence, because the picture of the complainant put before the jury was nevertheless a sufficiently accurate one.

Read More

R v PMH (2018)

The court considered issues relating to the impact of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 s.28 and the pre-recorded cross-examination of vulnerable child witnesses, and provided guidance regarding best practice for trial judges and advocates.

Read More

R v M (2018)

It was best practice for a judge to direct a jury before the cross-examination of a vulnerable witness that limitations had been placed on the defence counsel and to explain after the cross-examination the type of issues which the defendant would have wished to explore in further detail. Such directions should be repeated in the […]

Read More

R v LW (2018)

A Lucas direction would not have been appropriate, or helpful to the defendant. where an allegation of sexual assault turned wholly on the jury’s assessment of the respective credibility of the defendant and the complainant.

Read More