Z, R v

Z, R v

The conviction was unsafe due to the erroneous admission of unreliable confession evidence, misdirections on the defence of duress regarding escape and voluntary association, and failure to properly instruct the jury that voluntary association must relate to anticipation of threats to commit crimes of the type charged.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Z
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 February 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction quashed.
Legal Topics
Duress, Confession, Voluntary Association, Misdirection, Police and Criminal Evidence Act, Human Rights Act, Contempt of Court
Criminal Law Duress Confession Voluntary Association Misdirection Police and Criminal Evidence Act Human Rights Act Contempt of Court

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 6 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Z

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of confidential police interview as evidence
  2. 2 Proper directions on the defence of duress
  3. 3 Scope of voluntary association limitation to duress

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was unsafe due to the erroneous admission of unreliable confession evidence, misdirections on the defence of duress regarding escape and voluntary association, and failure to properly instruct the jury that voluntary association must relate to anticipation of threats to commit crimes of the type charged.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction quashed.

Orders

  • Conviction on count 2 quashed.
  • Order under section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 prohibiting publicity of the officer's report and the fact that Z spoke to police about X and Y, except in a complete report of the judgment or legal journal.