Conroy, R. v

Conroy, R. v

The judge's summing-up, even if imprecise in separating process from outcome, was not materially adverse to the defence and did not misdirect the jury. The jury properly assessed the psychiatric evidence and were entitled to reject the defence of diminished responsibility. Any misstatement in the summing-up did not affect the safety of the conviction.

Parties
Appellant: Jason John Conroy; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Murder, Diminished Responsibility, Psychiatric Evidence, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Murder Diminished Responsibility Psychiatric Evidence 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jason John Conroy

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge materially misdirected the jury on the requirement of diminished responsibility under section 2 of the Homicide Act 1957 as substituted by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, specifically regarding the ability to form a rational judgment.

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's summing-up, even if imprecise in separating process from outcome, was not materially adverse to the defence and did not misdirect the jury. The jury properly assessed the psychiatric evidence and were entitled to reject the defence of diminished responsibility. Any misstatement in the summing-up did not affect the safety of the conviction.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Conviction for murder upheld
  • Sentence to be expressed as custody for life under section 93 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000