||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 508 (Jul)
|| EWCA Crim 2100
||Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Longmore LJ, Dobbs J and Judge Rogers QC
||Angus Gloag (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for the defendant.
||Jonathan Kirk (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the Crown.
||19 July 2005
Criminal law - Trial - No case to answer - Robbery on train - Complainant identifying defendant on station platform, shortly after incident - Discrepancies in identification evidence - Whether judge erring in rejecting submission of no case to answer.
It would have been quite wrong for the judge to have acceded to a submission of no case to answer, on the basis of discrepancies in the identification evidence, where the complainant had been robbed in a train and had identified the defendant as one of the robbers on the platform of the railway station. Although there had been discrepancies in the identification evidence, the complainant had identified the defendant very soon after the incident. Moreover, the jury's decision to convict the defendant of robbery, on the basis of the totality of the evidence and the judge's directions, could not be criticised.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- 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