R v Monica Williams

R v Monica Williams

The verdicts were not inconsistent because the jury could rationally have been sure the appellant made a dishonest misrepresentation in the Right to Buy application (count 2), but not sure she had a legal duty to disclose her change of residence or that her failure to do so was dishonest (count 1). The judge's directions were adequate and the appeal is dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Monica Williams; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Fraud, Jury Directions, Inconsistent Verdicts
Criminal Law Fraud Jury Directions Inconsistent Verdicts

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

Parties

Monica Williams

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

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

Ratio Decidendi

The verdicts were not inconsistent because the jury could rationally have been sure the appellant made a dishonest misrepresentation in the Right to Buy application (count 2), but not sure she had a legal duty to disclose her change of residence or that her failure to do so was dishonest (count 1). The judge's directions were adequate and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed