SW, R. v

SW, R. v

The judge's directions on cross-admissibility were inadequate and failed to give the jury necessary guidance, resulting in unsafe verdicts. The counts should have been severed, and the lack of proper directions and consideration of prejudice rendered the convictions unsafe.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: SW
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Convictions quashed; leave to appeal granted; retrial invited.
Legal Topics
Bad Character Evidence, Cross Admissibility, Severance of Counts, Jury Directions, Sexual Offences
Criminal Law Bad Character Evidence Cross Admissibility Severance of Counts Jury Directions Sexual Offences

Source-derived case record

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

SW

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury on cross-admissibility of evidence between counts
  2. 2 Whether evidence of bad character was wrongly admitted or used
  3. 3 Whether the counts should have been severed due to prejudice

Ratio Decidendi

The judge's directions on cross-admissibility were inadequate and failed to give the jury necessary guidance, resulting in unsafe verdicts. The counts should have been severed, and the lack of proper directions and consideration of prejudice rendered the convictions unsafe.

Court Disposition

Convictions quashed; leave to appeal granted; retrial invited.

Orders

  • Convictions on counts 1, 2 and 3 quashed.
  • Leave to appeal on counts 4 to 10, 14 and 15 granted and convictions quashed.