6 Dec 1994
The conviction was unsafe because the trial judge failed to deal with material cross-examination answers in which both identification witnesses admitted they were not sure the person they picked out was the one who had threatened them, and accordingly the appeal was allowed and the sentence set aside.
11 Aug 1987
Although the form of cross-examination inviting the accused to call other witnesses liars was improper, it did not constitute such an irregularity as to require intervention; and a Broadhurst-style direction on lies was not required in this case because the killing was undisputed, the defence of a suicide pact imposed the burden on the accused to prove it on the balance of probabilities, and the jury were entitled to rely on the Crown's evidence and the applicant's inconsistent accounts to reject the suicide pact defence; accordingly the application for leave to appeal against conviction was…