Majid, R v

Majid, R v

Despite minor defects in jury directions and improper cross-examination, the evidence against the appellant was strong and the jury was not confused to the extent of applying a lower standard of proof; therefore, the verdicts were not unsafe.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Abdul Majid
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Standard of Proof, Jury Directions, Cross Examination, Unsafe Verdict
Criminal Law Standard of Proof Jury Directions Cross Examination Unsafe Verdict

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Abdul Majid

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the jury directions on the standard of proof rendered the verdict unsafe
  2. 2 Whether improper cross-examination regarding religious oath undermined the fairness of the trial

Ratio Decidendi

Despite minor defects in jury directions and improper cross-examination, the evidence against the appellant was strong and the jury was not confused to the extent of applying a lower standard of proof; therefore, the verdicts were not unsafe.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • leave to argue the point regarding improper cross-examination granted
  • verdicts stand