George v R

George v R

The conviction is unsafe because the jury was misled as to the significance of the single particle of firearm discharge residue found in the appellant's coat. Fresh expert evidence established that the FDR finding was neutral and inconclusive, providing no support for the prosecution case. Had the jury been properly...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Barry George; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Fresh Evidence, Forensic Evidence, Firearm Discharge Residue, Safety of Conviction, Miscarriage of Justice
Criminal Law Fresh Evidence Forensic Evidence Firearm Discharge Residue Safety of Conviction Miscarriage of Justice

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barry George

Appellant

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fresh forensic evidence renders the conviction unsafe
  2. 2 Whether the presentation and interpretation of firearm discharge residue evidence at trial was misleading
  3. 3 Whether the conviction should be quashed in light of new expert evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction is unsafe because the jury was misled as to the significance of the single particle of firearm discharge residue found in the appellant's coat. Fresh expert evidence established that the FDR finding was neutral and inconclusive, providing no support for the prosecution case. Had the jury been properly directed, there is no certainty they would have convicted the appellant.

Court Disposition

Conviction quashed

Orders

  • The conviction is quashed.