AG v Le Gros 25-Jan-2021 [2021] JRC 022 (25 January 2021)

AG v Le Gros 25-Jan-2021 [2021] JRC 022 (25 January 2021)

Only the girlfriend's evidence of the Defendant's prior MDMA use is admitted as bad character evidence under Articles 82F and 82I, as it is recent, relevant, and probative for propensity and correcting false impression. The steroid and cannabis production convictions are excluded as irrelevant or too remote. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] JRC 022
Parties
Defendant: The Defendant; Complainant: The Complainant; Prosecution: Crown Advocate Thomas
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
25 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Evidentiary Ruling
Outcome
Prosecution application granted in part; defence application pending prosecution's agreement.
Legal Topics
Bad Character Evidence, Propensity, False Impression, Admissibility of Evidence
Criminal Law Evidence Bad Character Evidence Propensity False Impression Admissibility of Evidence

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Defendant

Defendant

The Complainant

Complainant

Crown Advocate Thomas

Prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial Evidentiary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether bad character evidence relating to the Defendant and Complainant should be admitted under Articles 82F, 82I, and 82J of the Police Procedures and Criminal Evidence (Jersey) Law 2003
  2. 2 Whether previous convictions and allegations are relevant to important matters in issue
  3. 3 Whether evidence would have an adverse effect on the fairness of proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Only the girlfriend's evidence of the Defendant's prior MDMA use is admitted as bad character evidence under Articles 82F and 82I, as it is recent, relevant, and probative for propensity and correcting false impression. The steroid and cannabis production convictions are excluded as irrelevant or too remote. The Complainant's prior cannabis caution may be admitted if the prosecution agrees, in the interests of fairness.

Court Disposition

Prosecution application granted in part; defence application pending prosecution's agreement.

Orders

  • Girlfriend's evidence of Defendant's prior MDMA use admitted under Articles 82F and 82I.
  • Steroid convictions and cannabis production conviction excluded.