Smith, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 342 (13 March 2024)
The trial judge's directions on cross-admissibility, particularly on propensity, were inadequate, imprecise, and not properly tailored to the facts, creating a real risk that the jury may have misapplied the law. The deficiencies were significant enough that the convictions could not be considered safe.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2024] EWCA Crim 342
- Parties
- Respondent: Rex; Appellant: Ben Smith
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 13 March 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; retrial ordered.
- Legal Topics
- Cross Admissibility, Bad Character Evidence, Jury Directions, Sexual Offences, Propensity, Coincidence, Controlling or Coercive Behaviour
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Respondent
Ben Smith
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge's directions on cross-admissibility (coincidence and propensity) were adequate and properly tailored to the facts
- 2 Whether the convictions are unsafe due to deficiencies in the directions given to the jury
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge's directions on cross-admissibility, particularly on propensity, were inadequate, imprecise, and not properly tailored to the facts, creating a real risk that the jury may have misapplied the law. The deficiencies were significant enough that the convictions could not be considered safe.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; retrial ordered.
Orders
- All convictions quashed.
- Retrial ordered on all counts.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment