Randall, R v

Randall, R v

The judge misdirected the jury by restricting the relevance of Glean’s bad character to credibility, excluding its relevance to propensity and the likelihood of committing the offence, which was significant given the cutthroat defence. This misdirection warranted allowing the appeal and ordering a retrial.

Parties
Appellant: Edward Peter Randall; Co Accused: Nicholas Glean; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal allowed, retrial ordered
Legal Topics
Bad Character Evidence, Manslaughter, Jury Directions, Propensity Evidence
Criminal Law Bad Character Evidence Manslaughter Jury Directions Propensity Evidence

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Peter Randall

Appellant

Nicholas Glean

Co Accused

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury on the relevance of Glean’s bad character.
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge failed to properly direct the jury on the legal basis for a manslaughter verdict, particularly regarding intent.

Ratio Decidendi

The judge misdirected the jury by restricting the relevance of Glean’s bad character to credibility, excluding its relevance to propensity and the likelihood of committing the offence, which was significant given the cutthroat defence. This misdirection warranted allowing the appeal and ordering a retrial.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed, retrial ordered

Orders

  • conviction quashed
  • retrial ordered