R v Steven McInerney

R v Steven McInerney

It is improper for defence counsel to suggest possible reasons for a defendant's silence in the absence of evidence; the trial judge was correct to prevent such speculation, and the conviction is safe based on the evidence.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Applicant: Steven McInerney
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction dismissed
Legal Topics
Adverse Inference From Silence, Jury Directions, Murder, Joint Enterprise
Criminal Law Adverse Inference From Silence Jury Directions Murder Joint Enterprise

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Steven McInerney

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in precluding defence counsel from suggesting possible reasons for the applicant's silence at trial
  2. 2 Whether the conviction is safe given the evidence presented

Ratio Decidendi

It is improper for defence counsel to suggest possible reasons for a defendant's silence in the absence of evidence; the trial judge was correct to prevent such speculation, and the conviction is safe based on the evidence.

Court Disposition

renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction dismissed