Hewitt, R.
The judge was entitled to conclude that the trial process compensated for any prejudice arising from delay and disclosure failures. The appellant was able to cross-examine effectively, and the jury were properly directed. No serious prejudice was shown to render the trial unfair or the conviction unsafe.
- Parties
- Respondent: The Queen; Appellant: Douglas Joseph Hewitt
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 01 October 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.
- Legal Topics
- Abuse of Process, Disclosure, Historic Sexual Offences, Fair Trial, Delay, Missing Documentation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
The Queen
Respondent
Douglas Joseph Hewitt
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to stay the indictment for abuse of process due to flawed disclosure and missing documentation
- 2 Whether the judge's directions to the jury regarding delay and missing documentation were adequate
Ratio Decidendi
The judge was entitled to conclude that the trial process compensated for any prejudice arising from delay and disclosure failures. The appellant was able to cross-examine effectively, and the jury were properly directed. No serious prejudice was shown to render the trial unfair or the conviction unsafe.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.
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