Wickens, R v [2003] EWCA Crim 2196 (17 June 2003)

Wickens, R v [2003] EWCA Crim 2196 (17 June 2003)

The conviction was unsafe because the jury was not informed that the Crown's own pathologist considered death at the time alleged by the prosecution to be 'extremely unlikely', which could have materially affected their assessment of the reliability of the prosecution's case.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2003] EWCA Crim 2196
Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Defendant: Trevor Wickens
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Following CCRC Referral
Outcome
appeal allowed, conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Murder, Conviction Safety, Non Disclosure, Pathological Evidence, Criminal Cases Review Commission
Criminal Law Murder Conviction Safety Non Disclosure Pathological Evidence Criminal Cases Review Commission

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Trevor Wickens

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Following CCRC Referral

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-disclosure of pathological evidence rendered the conviction unsafe
  2. 2 Whether new expert evidence on time of death undermined the prosecution case

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was unsafe because the jury was not informed that the Crown's own pathologist considered death at the time alleged by the prosecution to be 'extremely unlikely', which could have materially affected their assessment of the reliability of the prosecution's case.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed, conviction quashed

Orders

  • No retrial ordered