Sothilingham, R. v

Sothilingham, R. v

The court held that, although it would have been preferable for the judge to give a specific direction warning the jury not to place undue weight on the transcript, the circumstances of the case justified the judge's decision to allow the jury to retain the transcript. The judge's directions as a whole were fair and did not undermine the safety of the conviction. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Parties
Prosecutor: Regina; Appellant: Prashad Sothilingham
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Evidence, Hearsay, Jury Directions, Fair Trial, Bad Character Evidence
Criminal Law Admissibility of Evidence Hearsay Jury Directions Fair Trial Bad Character Evidence

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

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

Prashad Sothilingham

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in allowing the jury to retain a transcript of the deceased's ABE interview during deliberations
  2. 2 Whether the retention of the transcript rendered the conviction unsafe

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, although it would have been preferable for the judge to give a specific direction warning the jury not to place undue weight on the transcript, the circumstances of the case justified the judge's decision to allow the jury to retain the transcript. The judge's directions as a whole were fair and did not undermine the safety of the conviction. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed