George, R. v [2002] EWCA Crim 1923 (29 July 2002)

George, R. v [2002] EWCA Crim 1923 (29 July 2002)

The conviction is not unsafe. Identification evidence, including partial and non-identification, was properly admitted and left to the jury. Delay and adverse publicity did not render the trial unfair. The judge's decisions on admissibility and abuse of process were correct.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Crim 1923
Parties
Respondent: R; Appellant: Barry Michael George
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Identification Evidence, Abuse of Process, Admissibility of Evidence, Delay, Adverse Publicity
Criminal Law Identification Evidence Abuse of Process Admissibility of Evidence Delay Adverse Publicity

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Respondent

Barry Michael George

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction is unsafe due to flawed identification evidence
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution should have been stayed for abuse of process due to delay and adverse publicity
  3. 3 Admissibility of partial and non-identification evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction is not unsafe. Identification evidence, including partial and non-identification, was properly admitted and left to the jury. Delay and adverse publicity did not render the trial unfair. The judge's decisions on admissibility and abuse of process were correct.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction upheld
  • No stay of prosecution