||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 201 (Feb)
||Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Lord Woolf CJ, Davis and Field JJ
||Paul Dockery (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for the first appellant.
||Mark Benson (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for the second appellant.
||Andrew O'Byrne (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the Crown.
||14 February 2005
Criminal evidence and procedure - Trial - Jury - Possession of a prohibited firearm and ammunition - Evidence of propensity of co-accused - Refusal of trial judge to admit evidence.
In the circumstances, while the evidence of a co-defendant's previous connection with firearms had been relevant to the other defendants' cases the error in not admitting it was not sufficient to render the conviction by the jury as unsafe. The purpose of admitting the evidence for the co-defendants was to prove to the jury that M had a propensity to be connected with firearms and was therefore most likely to be guilty of the offence of possession for which they all had stood trial. As the jury had found M guilty of that offence, the co-defendants' cases had not been prejudiced by not having the evidence admitted.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary