Wickens, R v

Wickens, R v

The conviction was quashed because the jury did not hear the Crown pathologist's professional judgment that death at the time alleged in the confessions was 'extremely unlikely', which would have provided significant support for the defence and could have affected the jury's verdict. The non-disclosure of this evidence rendered the conviction unsafe.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Defendant: Trevor Wickens
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 June 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction After Reference by Criminal Cases Review Commission
Outcome
appeal allowed, conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Murder, Appeals, Non Disclosure, Fresh Evidence, Pathology Evidence, Safety of Conviction
Criminal Law Murder Appeals Non Disclosure Fresh Evidence Pathology Evidence Safety of Conviction

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Trevor Wickens

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction After Reference by Criminal Cases Review Commission

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-disclosure of pathological evidence affected the safety of the conviction
  2. 2 Whether fresh pathological evidence rendered the conviction unsafe

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was quashed because the jury did not hear the Crown pathologist's professional judgment that death at the time alleged in the confessions was 'extremely unlikely', which would have provided significant support for the defence and could have affected the jury's verdict. The non-disclosure of this evidence rendered the conviction unsafe.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed, conviction quashed

Orders

  • conviction quashed
  • no retrial ordered