Slack and Johnson, R v [2010] EWCA Crim 1149 (28 May 2010)

Slack and Johnson, R v [2010] EWCA Crim 1149 (28 May 2010)

The bad character evidence against Johnson was properly admitted and remained relevant after the prosecution case changed, as it related to her propensity for violence and encouragement. The judge's refusal to discharge the jury was correct, and the summing up on bad character evidence was adequate. The joint trial...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2010] EWCA Crim 1149
Parties
Prosecution: R; Appellant/defendant: Slack; Appellant/defendant: Johnson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 May 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Conviction Appeals
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Bad Character Evidence, Joint Enterprise, Admissibility of Evidence, Jury Directions, Severance of Indictment, No Case to Answer, Manslaughter, Murder
Criminal Law Bad Character Evidence Joint Enterprise Admissibility of Evidence Jury Directions Severance of Indictment No Case to Answer Manslaughter +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Prosecution

Slack

Appellant/defendant

Johnson

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Conviction Appeals

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the admission of bad character evidence against Johnson was proper and remained admissible after the prosecution case changed
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in refusing to discharge the jury after the prosecution case against Johnson shifted
  3. 3 Whether the judge's summing up on bad character evidence was adequate

Ratio Decidendi

The bad character evidence against Johnson was properly admitted and remained relevant after the prosecution case changed, as it related to her propensity for violence and encouragement. The judge's refusal to discharge the jury was correct, and the summing up on bad character evidence was adequate. The joint trial was appropriate, and the directions given to the jury were sufficient to prevent unfair prejudice to Slack. The convictions were safe.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed