McMaster, R. v [2004] NICC 34 (19 March 2004)

McMaster, R. v [2004] NICC 34 (19 March 2004)

The prosecution evidence, consisting solely of the defendant's admissions, was insufficient to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge of the explosive device in the vehicle; reasonable doubt remained as to his knowledge.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2004] NICC 34
Parties
Prosecution: The Queen; Defendant: Raymond James Craig McMaster
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
19 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
not guilty
Legal Topics
Explosive Substances, Intent, Statutory Presumptions, Burden of Proof, Directed Verdict, Admissibility of Statements
Criminal Law Explosive Substances Intent Statutory Presumptions Burden of Proof Directed Verdict Admissibility of Statements

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Queen

Prosecution

Raymond James Craig McMaster

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant possessed an explosive substance with intent
  2. 2 Whether the defendant did an act with intent to cause an explosion
  3. 3 Whether statutory presumptions under Terrorism Act 2000 apply

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution evidence, consisting solely of the defendant's admissions, was insufficient to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had knowledge of the explosive device in the vehicle; reasonable doubt remained as to his knowledge.

Court Disposition

not guilty

Orders

  • Defendant acquitted on both counts of possession of explosive substance with intent and doing an act with intent to cause an explosion.