Beresford v R. [2020] EWCA Crim 1674 (11 December 2020)

Beresford v R. [2020] EWCA Crim 1674 (11 December 2020)

The combined effect of the trial judge's impermissible interventions, including cross-examination of the appellant, unbalanced directions, and failure to tailor directions to the defence case, rendered the trial unfair and the conviction unsafe.

Citation
[2020] EWCA Crim 1674
Parties
Appellant: Cameron Beresford; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction From Crown Court at Truro
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; retrial ordered.
Legal Topics
Rape, Judicial Conduct, Jury Irregularity, Bad Character Evidence, Directions to Jury, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Rape Judicial Conduct Jury Irregularity Bad Character Evidence Directions to Jury Appeal Procedure

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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cameron Beresford

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction From Crown Court at Truro

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether judicial interventions rendered the trial unfair and conviction unsafe
  2. 2 Whether jury irregularity occurred due to internet research and pressure
  3. 3 Whether directions on bad character, drunkenness, and motive to lie were misdirections

Ratio Decidendi

The combined effect of the trial judge's impermissible interventions, including cross-examination of the appellant, unbalanced directions, and failure to tailor directions to the defence case, rendered the trial unfair and the conviction unsafe.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed; retrial ordered.

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • Retrial to be held in Plymouth or Exeter