AG v Warn 04-Nov-2020 [2020] JRC 232B (04 November 2020)
- Citation
- [2020] JRC 232B
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Posture
- Criminal / Jury Direction
More details
- Posture
- Criminal / Jury Direction
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
No direction for an alternative verdict of manslaughter is given because there is no evidence linking the defendant's act to the death of the deceased, and such a direction would encourage speculation.
Court disposition
No direction for alternative verdict of manslaughter given
02
Material facts
Parties
Crown
ProsecutionDefendant
Defendant Counsel: Advocate Thomas03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal / Jury Direction
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
Whether a direction for an alternative verdict of manslaughter should be given to the jury
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Advocate Thomas submitted that there is no evidence from which the jury could properly identify an act committed by the defendant which led to the death of the deceased.
- Respondent
- Neither counsel requested a direction for an alternative verdict of manslaughter.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Judicial reasoning
A direction should not be given to the jury where there is no evidence to support the alternative verdict.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
No direction for an alternative verdict of manslaughter is given because there is no evidence linking the defendant's act to the death of the deceased, and such a direction would encourage speculation.
Obiter and limits
- The lack of request from both counsel is a factor but not conclusive in the decision.
Court disposition
No direction for alternative verdict of manslaughter given
Source and reliance status
Official court record
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Court record
Judgment
JUDGMENT THE COMMISSIONER: 1. Shortly before we closed yesterday there was the opportunity to consider the possibility of a direction to the jury about alternative verdicts and I indicated that I would inform counsel of my decision as soon as possible.
2. The Judicial Secretary informed the Crown and defence of my decision last night and I am really just confirming now for the record that I accepted the submissions of Advocate Thomas that there is no evidence from which the jury could properly identify an act committed by the defendant which led to the death of the deceased. For that reason I could not identify the shape of the direction which I wold give to the jury in that respect, and so I am not going to include a direction for an alternative verdict of manslaughter as had been canvassed.
3. I should add that I am also influenced in reaching that conclusion by the fact that neither counsel wants me to give such a direction to the jury; and that is not conclusive which I recognise, but of course it is a factor in the way I have approached it. Ultimately the reason is that such a direction would encourage the jury to speculate. No Authorities Page Last Updated: 15 Dec 2020 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.