8 Mar 1996
The conviction was quashed because the trial judge materially failed to direct the jury on the proper use of the applicant's statements (including their partly exculpatory character), rendering the trial unfair; the proviso could not be applied to save the conviction.
26 Jul 1991
The fingerprint and palmprint evidence identically matched the applicant and, combined with corroborating witness evidence and proper jury directions on lies and flight, sufficiently supported the guilty verdict; the eleven year sentence was within judicial discretion given the seriousness of an organised night-time multi-room armed robbery by a group and absence of mitigating factors, and thus both applications for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence were refused.
2 Jul 1991
The judge correctly directed the jury on all material points of law, the prosecution evidence sufficed for the jury to convict beyond reasonable doubt, the applicant offered no arguable grounds of appeal, and the unverified, unavailable fresh evidence (missing witness letter) was insufficient to render the conviction unsafe or to justify a new trial; accordingly leave to appeal is refused.