DL v R.
The trial judge's failure to specifically direct the jury on reasonable excuse did not render the verdict unsafe because the direction on culpability and abuse of public trust sufficiently covered the issue. The evidence linking the concealed property to criminal activity was admissible and compelling. Alleged factual errors in summing up did not affect the safety of the verdict.
- Parties
- Appellant: DL; Respondent: The Queen
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 18 May 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Misconduct in Public Office, Concealing Criminal Property, Reasonable Excuse, Culpability, Admissibility of Evidence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
DL
Appellant
The Queen
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge erred in failing to leave the defence of reasonable excuse to the jury for the offence of wilful misconduct in public office
- 2 Whether the conviction for concealing criminal property was unsafe due to the admissibility of evidence linking the property to criminal activity
- 3 Whether factual errors in the judge's summing up rendered the verdict unsafe
Ratio Decidendi
The trial judge's failure to specifically direct the jury on reasonable excuse did not render the verdict unsafe because the direction on culpability and abuse of public trust sufficiently covered the issue. The evidence linking the concealed property to criminal activity was admissible and compelling. Alleged factual errors in summing up did not affect the safety of the verdict.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
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