Holden, R v

Holden, R v

The court found that the confession by Stuart Murray was wholly unreliable and incapable of belief, being made at a time when he was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia and delusional beliefs. The confession was retracted after treatment, and the evidence of Murray's mother and Bryden contradicted key aspects of his account. The psychiatric evidence was clear that the confession was a delusional memory. Accordingly, the proposed evidence was not admitted, and the conviction was found to be safe.

Parties
Respondent: R; Appellant: Kerry Holden
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
31 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction After Reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld
Legal Topics
Murder, Fresh Evidence, Confession, Mental Health and Criminal Responsibility, Hearsay Evidence, Safety of Conviction
Criminal Law Murder Fresh Evidence Confession Mental Health and Criminal Responsibility Hearsay Evidence Safety of 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Respondent

Kerry Holden

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction After Reference by the Criminal Cases Review Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the fresh confession evidence by Stuart Murray is reliable and capable of belief
  2. 2 Whether the conviction of Kerry Holden is safe in light of the fresh evidence
  3. 3 Admissibility of hearsay confession under Criminal Justice Act 2003 and Criminal Appeal Act 1968

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the confession by Stuart Murray was wholly unreliable and incapable of belief, being made at a time when he was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia and delusional beliefs. The confession was retracted after treatment, and the evidence of Murray's mother and Bryden contradicted key aspects of his account. The psychiatric evidence was clear that the confession was a delusional memory. Accordingly, the proposed evidence was not admitted, and the conviction was found to be safe.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld

Orders

  • Proposed fresh evidence of confession by Stuart Murray not admitted under s. 23 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968
  • Conviction of Kerry Holden for murder stands