Lanning & Anor v R. [2021] EWCA Crim 450 (30 March 2021)

Lanning & Anor v R. [2021] EWCA Crim 450 (30 March 2021)

The Court held that the trial judge was correct to admit the bad character evidence as it was relevant to whether the stabbing was deliberate, not merely to propensity, and its probative value outweighed any prejudicial effect. The judge's directions to the jury were sufficient to mitigate prejudice. The use of the knife by Lanning did not constitute an overwhelming supervening act; in the context of joint enterprise, such escalation was foreseeable and did not absolve Camille of liability. The indictment was not defective for omitting lesser counts, as the prosecution was entitled to focus on the homicide charges.

Citation
[2021] EWCA Crim 450
Parties
1st Appellant: Alex Christopher Lanning; 2nd Appellant: Jonathan Roy Camille; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction From Central Criminal Court to Court of Appeal (criminal Division)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Bad Character Evidence, Joint Enterprise, Murder, Manslaughter, Overwhelming Supervening Act, Admissibility of Evidence
Criminal Law Bad Character Evidence Joint Enterprise Murder Manslaughter Overwhelming Supervening Act Admissibility of 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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alex Christopher Lanning

1st Appellant

Jonathan Roy Camille

2nd Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction From Central Criminal Court to Court of Appeal (criminal Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting bad character evidence against Alex Lanning under sections 101(1)(d) and 101(1)(g) Criminal Justice Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge should have excluded the bad character evidence under section 101(3) Criminal Justice Act 2003
  3. 3 Whether the actions of Lanning constituted an overwhelming supervening act (OSA) such that Camille should not be liable for manslaughter

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the trial judge was correct to admit the bad character evidence as it was relevant to whether the stabbing was deliberate, not merely to propensity, and its probative value outweighed any prejudicial effect. The judge's directions to the jury were sufficient to mitigate prejudice. The use of the knife by Lanning did not constitute an overwhelming supervening act; in the context of joint enterprise, such escalation was foreseeable and did not absolve Camille of liability. The indictment was not defective for omitting lesser counts, as the prosecution was entitled to focus on the homicide charges.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal against conviction by Alex Lanning dismissed
  • Appeal against conviction by Jonathan Camille dismissed