Williams, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1236 (05 October 2023)

Williams, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1236 (05 October 2023)

The jury could rationally convict on count 2 and acquit on count 1 because the elements of each offence differed; specifically, the jury could be sure the appellant was not living at Etta Street on the relevant date (count 2), but not sure she had a legal duty to disclose this or acted dishonestly in failing to do so (count 1). The judge's directions were adequate and the verdicts were not inconsistent.

Citation
[2023] EWCA Crim 1236
Parties
Respondent: Rex; Appellant: Monica Williams
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
05 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction From Crown Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Fraud, Jury Directions, Inconsistent Verdicts, Right to Buy Scheme
Criminal Law Fraud Jury Directions Inconsistent Verdicts Right to Buy Scheme

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 1 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Respondent

Monica Williams

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction From Crown Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge misdirected the jury by failing to give certain directions
  2. 2 Whether the jury's verdicts were fundamentally inconsistent rendering the conviction unsafe

Ratio Decidendi

The jury could rationally convict on count 2 and acquit on count 1 because the elements of each offence differed; specifically, the jury could be sure the appellant was not living at Etta Street on the relevant date (count 2), but not sure she had a legal duty to disclose this or acted dishonestly in failing to do so (count 1). The judge's directions were adequate and the verdicts were not inconsistent.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed