Christian, R. v [2018] EWCA Crim 1344 (25 January 2018)

Christian, R. v [2018] EWCA Crim 1344 (25 January 2018)

The trial judge was entitled to conclude, after rigorous evaluation, that the applicant's reaction was so extreme and protracted that no properly directed jury could find the notional reasonable person might have reacted similarly; thus, the partial defence of loss of control was not left to the jury. The judge properly admitted previous convictions as relevant to credibility and correctly directed the jury to consider wound trajectories.

Citation
[2018] EWCA Crim 1344
Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Applicant: Foster Reginald Christian
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction refused
Legal Topics
Murder, Loss of Control Defence, Bad Character Evidence, Self Defence
Criminal Law Murder Loss of Control Defence Bad Character Evidence Self Defence

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Foster Reginald Christian

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the partial defence of loss of control should have been left to the jury
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in admitting evidence of previous convictions for violence
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in directing the jury to consider the trajectory of wounds

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to conclude, after rigorous evaluation, that the applicant's reaction was so extreme and protracted that no properly directed jury could find the notional reasonable person might have reacted similarly; thus, the partial defence of loss of control was not left to the jury. The judge properly admitted previous convictions as relevant to credibility and correctly directed the jury to consider wound trajectories.

Court Disposition

renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction refused