R v Penelope Jackson

R v Penelope Jackson

The judge's directions to the jury were fair and adequate, properly addressing the cumulative nature of the alleged abuse and the context for the loss of control defence. The prosecution was not required to call or tender unused witnesses, and the defence was not prejudiced as they could call them. The release of digital evidence to the media did not render the conviction unsafe as there was no evidence of prejudice. No material irregularity or unfairness occurred, and the conviction is safe.

Parties
Respondent: Rex; Appellant: Penelope Jackson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Conviction
Outcome
Application dismissed
Legal Topics
Murder, Loss of Control Defence, Domestic Abuse, Coercive Control, Disclosure of Evidence, Media Reporting in Trials
Criminal Law Murder Loss of Control Defence Domestic Abuse Coercive Control Disclosure of Evidence Media Reporting in Trials

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Respondent

Penelope Jackson

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury on the cumulative nature of the trigger for loss of control
  2. 2 Whether the judge misdirected the jury regarding the prosecution's case on exaggeration or invention of domestic abuse
  3. 3 Whether the judge erred in refusing to compel the prosecution to call or tender certain witnesses

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's directions to the jury were fair and adequate, properly addressing the cumulative nature of the alleged abuse and the context for the loss of control defence. The prosecution was not required to call or tender unused witnesses, and the defence was not prejudiced as they could call them. The release of digital evidence to the media did not render the conviction unsafe as there was no evidence of prejudice. No material irregularity or unfairness occurred, and the conviction is safe.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed

Orders

  • Renewed application for leave to appeal conviction dismissed