GP, R. v

GP, R. v

The court found no evidence that the jury was under improper pressure or that the trial was unfair. The judge gave clear directions that there was no time pressure, the jury had ample time to deliberate, and their mixed verdicts indicated careful consideration. The applicant's arguments were speculative and unsupported by the record. The convictions were safe.

Parties
Applicant: GP; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Indecent Assault, Jury Deliberations, Covid 19 Impact on Trials, Appeal Against Conviction
Criminal Law Indecent Assault Jury Deliberations Covid 19 Impact on Trials Appeal Against 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

GP

Applicant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the jury was placed under improper pressure to reach a verdict due to the developing Covid-19 public health emergency, rendering the convictions unsafe

Ratio Decidendi

The court found no evidence that the jury was under improper pressure or that the trial was unfair. The judge gave clear directions that there was no time pressure, the jury had ample time to deliberate, and their mixed verdicts indicated careful consideration. The applicant's arguments were speculative and unsupported by the record. The convictions were safe.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused