Cooper, R v

Cooper, R v

The convictions on Counts 2 and 8 are unsafe due to improper jury directions on Count 8, potential reliance on unsafe verdicts for cross-admissibility, and lack of tailored directions regarding propensity evidence.

Parties
Respondent: R.; Appellant: Derrick Cooper
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
29 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal allowed; convictions quashed.
Legal Topics
Child Cruelty, Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm, Bad Character Evidence, Cross Admissibility, Jury Directions, Unsafe Conviction
Criminal Law Child Cruelty Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm Bad Character Evidence Cross Admissibility Jury Directions Unsafe Conviction

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R.

Respondent

Derrick Cooper

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the convictions on Counts 2 and 8 are safe
  2. 2 Whether jury directions corresponded to the indictment particulars
  3. 3 Whether cross-admissibility and bad character evidence were properly deployed

Ratio Decidendi

The convictions on Counts 2 and 8 are unsafe due to improper jury directions on Count 8, potential reliance on unsafe verdicts for cross-admissibility, and lack of tailored directions regarding propensity evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; convictions quashed.

Orders

  • Convictions on Counts 2 and 8 quashed.
  • No retrial ordered.