Jessop v R

Jessop v R

The trial judge gave adequate and fair directions to the jury on all relevant matters, including adverse inferences from silence, inconsistencies in witness evidence, and the credibility of prosecution witnesses. There was no misdirection or unfairness that rendered the conviction unsafe.

Parties
Appellant: Stephen Jessop; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
22 March 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Violent Disorder, Adverse Inference From Silence, Jury Directions, Witness Credibility
Criminal Law Violent Disorder Adverse Inference From Silence Jury Directions Witness Credibility

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 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Jessop

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury regarding adverse inferences from the appellant's silence
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to properly direct the jury on inconsistencies and weaknesses in prosecution witness evidence
  3. 3 Whether the judge improperly elevated the evidence of a prosecution witness

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge gave adequate and fair directions to the jury on all relevant matters, including adverse inferences from silence, inconsistencies in witness evidence, and the credibility of prosecution witnesses. There was no misdirection or unfairness that rendered the conviction unsafe.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed