Twomey & Ors, R. v

Twomey & Ors, R. v

The trial by judge alone was lawful and fair under statutory provisions due to proven risk of jury tampering; no unfairness arose from PII material; severance was not required; Brockwell's evidence was reliable; there was sufficient evidence against Cameron; sentences imposed were appropriate and not manifestly excessive.

Parties
Prosecution: R; Appellant: John Twomey; Appellant: Peter Blake; Appellant: Barry Hibberd; Appellant: Glen Cameron
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed
Legal Topics
Jury Tampering, Trial by Judge Alone, Public Interest Immunity, Robbery, Firearms Offences, Sentencing
Criminal Law Procedure Jury Tampering Trial by Judge Alone Public Interest Immunity Robbery Firearms Offences Sentencing

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 5 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Prosecution

John Twomey

Appellant

Peter Blake

Appellant

Barry Hibberd

Appellant

Glen Cameron

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether trial by judge alone under section 44 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 was lawful and fair given jury tampering and public interest immunity.
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge's handling of public interest immunity material prejudiced the appellants.
  3. 3 Whether severance should have been ordered for defendants not proved to be involved in jury tampering.

Ratio Decidendi

The trial by judge alone was lawful and fair under statutory provisions due to proven risk of jury tampering; no unfairness arose from PII material; severance was not required; Brockwell's evidence was reliable; there was sufficient evidence against Cameron; sentences imposed were appropriate and not manifestly excessive.

Court Disposition

appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed

Orders

  • Convictions upheld for all appellants.
  • Sentences affirmed for Hibberd and Cameron.