Lawless & Anor, R v

Lawless & Anor, R v

The alleged fresh evidence from Chantelle Day was inadmissible hearsay and did not undermine the convictions; jury directions regarding the diary entry were ultimately sufficient, and there was evidence upon which a properly directed jury could convict both appellants.

Parties
Prosecution: R (The Crown); Appellant: Ian John Lawless; Appellant: Gary John Lawson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Murder, Conspiracy, Admissibility of Evidence, Hearsay, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Murder Conspiracy Admissibility of Evidence Hearsay Jury Directions

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R (The Crown)

Prosecution

Ian John Lawless

Appellant

Gary John Lawson

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether confessions and hearsay evidence were admissible on appeal
  2. 2 Whether jury directions regarding prejudicial evidence (diary entry) were adequate
  3. 3 Whether fresh evidence should be admitted under section 23 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968

Ratio Decidendi

The alleged fresh evidence from Chantelle Day was inadmissible hearsay and did not undermine the convictions; jury directions regarding the diary entry were ultimately sufficient, and there was evidence upon which a properly directed jury could convict both appellants.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Both appeals against conviction are dismissed.