R v Jing Du

R v Jing Du

The conviction is unsafe because the jury was not properly directed to consider separately the elements of acquiring property and knowledge or suspicion that it was criminal property. The technical deficiency in the directions, corroborated by the circumstances and fresh evidence, justifies quashing the conviction. There is good reason for the extension of time due to credible explanations for the delay.

Parties
Applicant/appellant: Jing Du; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Application for Leave to Appeal, Extension of Time, and to Adduce Fresh Evidence
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction quashed; no retrial ordered
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Conviction, Adducing Fresh Evidence, Jury Directions, Modern Slavery, Extension of Time
Criminal Law Appeal Against Conviction Adducing Fresh Evidence Jury Directions Modern Slavery Extension of Time

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jing Du

Applicant/appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Application for Leave to Appeal, Extension of Time, and to Adduce Fresh Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction is unsafe due to deficient jury directions on the elements of the offence under section 329(1)(a) Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
  2. 2 Whether fresh evidence (text messages) should be admitted
  3. 3 Whether there is good reason to grant an extension of time for appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction is unsafe because the jury was not properly directed to consider separately the elements of acquiring property and knowledge or suspicion that it was criminal property. The technical deficiency in the directions, corroborated by the circumstances and fresh evidence, justifies quashing the conviction. There is good reason for the extension of time due to credible explanations for the delay.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction quashed; no retrial ordered

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • No retrial ordered