Bain, R v

Bain, R v

The directions given by the trial judge, though not in the modern Lucas form, were adequate for the law as it stood in 1971 and sufficiently conveyed to the jury that lies are not necessarily evidence of guilt and that innocent explanations must be considered. The conviction is not unsafe due to any deficiency in the judge's treatment of alleged lies or the plastic strip evidence.

Parties
Respondent: R; Appellant: Alfred Bain
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
09 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction After Reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld
Legal Topics
Murder, Directions on Lies, Alibi, Unsafe Conviction, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Murder Directions on Lies Alibi Unsafe Conviction Jury Directions

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Respondent

Alfred Bain

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction After Reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge failed to adequately direct the jury on the effect of lies told by the defendant
  2. 2 Whether the conviction is unsafe due to deficiencies in the summing-up regarding lies and the plastic strip evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The directions given by the trial judge, though not in the modern Lucas form, were adequate for the law as it stood in 1971 and sufficiently conveyed to the jury that lies are not necessarily evidence of guilt and that innocent explanations must be considered. The conviction is not unsafe due to any deficiency in the judge's treatment of alleged lies or the plastic strip evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld