5 Dec 2023
The application for leave to appeal was refused because the issues raised were matters properly for the jury, the evidence adduced supported the conviction, and the judge gave a full and fair summing-up including an appropriate lies direction in accordance with guidance, so there was no reasonably arguable ground of appeal.
12 Feb 1991
The Court held that the trial judge gave adequate directions regarding the informant's credibility (immunity and caution), no accomplice warning was required because the informant was not an accomplice, the absence of calling co-accused who pleaded guilty did not vitiate the prosecution case, the jury were properly directed and could reach different verdicts on separate counts, and the sentences imposed fell within appropriate sentencing guidelines; accordingly leave to appeal against conviction and sentence was refused.
26 Feb 1990
Because the record was silent and there was no indication the magistrate considered whether PW2 and PW3 might be accomplices or gave himself the necessary accomplice warning or caution, the conviction was unsafe and must be set aside.
23 Apr 1986
The judge's directions, taken as a whole, were adequate; the trial judge properly exercised his discretion on joint trial and handling of confession evidence; alleged inaccuracies in the summing-up were immaterial and did not render convictions unsafe, therefore applications for leave to appeal against conviction were dismissed.
8 Aug 1985
When a co-defendant gives evidence implicating another co-defendant the decision whether and how to warn the jury about reliance on that evidence is a matter of judicial discretion; the trial judge did not misapply the law in declining to give the 'full treatment' and the summing up, though terse, was not so defective as to render the convictions unsafe.
The conviction was unsafe because the magistrate relied on what he described as corroboration from PW3 without evaluating PW3's credibility or treating him as an accomplice or warning himself of the dangers of relying on such evidence; accordingly the conviction and sentence were set aside and a retrial ordered.