Goring v Regina

Goring v Regina

There was sufficient circumstantial evidence, including CCTV footage and expert interpretation, for a reasonable jury to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty of murder and possession of an offensive weapon. The trial judge was correct to refuse the submission of no case to answer, and the summing up was fair and balanced. The appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Curtis Lee Goring; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Murder, Possession of Offensive Weapon, Affray, No Case to Answer Submission, Circumstantial Evidence, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Murder Possession of Offensive Weapon Affray No Case to Answer Submission Circumstantial Evidence Jury Directions

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Curtis Lee Goring

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a case to answer for murder and possession of an offensive weapon based on circumstantial evidence
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing a submission of no case to answer
  3. 3 Whether the summing up to the jury was fair and balanced

Ratio Decidendi

There was sufficient circumstantial evidence, including CCTV footage and expert interpretation, for a reasonable jury to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty of murder and possession of an offensive weapon. The trial judge was correct to refuse the submission of no case to answer, and the summing up was fair and balanced. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed