RT, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1118 (12 September 2023)

RT, R. v [2023] EWCA Crim 1118 (12 September 2023)

The failure to give a negative direction to the jury regarding the appellant's silence in police interview, in circumstances where section 34 was not triggered but the 'no comment' interview was in evidence, created a real risk that the jury would treat the silence as probative of guilt. This omission was seriously prejudicial and rendered the convictions unsafe.

Citation
[2023] EWCA Crim 1118
Parties
Appellant: RT; Respondent: Rex (The Crown)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 September 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction, Permission Granted Out of Time
Outcome
Appeal allowed, convictions quashed, no retrial ordered.
Legal Topics
Adverse Inference, Right to Silence, Judicial Directions, Unsafe Conviction, Section 34 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994
Criminal Law Adverse Inference Right to Silence Judicial Directions Unsafe Conviction Section 34 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

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

Parties

RT

Appellant

Rex (The Crown)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction, Permission Granted Out of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the failure to give a negative direction regarding the appellant's silence in police interview rendered the conviction unsafe
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in not giving a McGarry direction in circumstances where section 34 was not triggered

Ratio Decidendi

The failure to give a negative direction to the jury regarding the appellant's silence in police interview, in circumstances where section 34 was not triggered but the 'no comment' interview was in evidence, created a real risk that the jury would treat the silence as probative of guilt. This omission was seriously prejudicial and rendered the convictions unsafe.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed, convictions quashed, no retrial ordered.

Orders

  • Extension of time granted for appeal.
  • Permission to appeal granted.