Gibson, R. v Rev 1

Gibson, R. v Rev 1

The trial judge exercised his discretion properly in admitting the accomplice evidence with appropriate warnings, there was sufficient evidence for the case to go to the jury, the refusal to discharge the jury after the retraction of false evidence was justified and adequately addressed by judicial directions, and the applicant's new evidence was not credible nor was there a reasonable explanation for its absence at trial; thus, no ground for appeal was established.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant / Defendant: Leslie Gordon Gibson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 January 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Murder, Accomplice Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Jury Directions, Fresh Evidence, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Murder Accomplice Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Jury Directions Fresh Evidence Appeal Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Leslie Gordon Gibson

Appellant / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting accomplice evidence of Annamari Weeks
  2. 2 Whether there was a case to answer against the applicant
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in refusing to discharge the jury after the retraction of false evidence by defence witnesses

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge exercised his discretion properly in admitting the accomplice evidence with appropriate warnings, there was sufficient evidence for the case to go to the jury, the refusal to discharge the jury after the retraction of false evidence was justified and adequately addressed by judicial directions, and the applicant's new evidence was not credible nor was there a reasonable explanation for its absence at trial; thus, no ground for appeal was established.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal refused