||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 71 (Jun)
||Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Laws LJ, Holland J and Dame Heather Steel
||David Lyons (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for the defendant.
||Scott Stemp (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the Crown.
||10 June 2005
Criminal evidence and procedure - Trial - Direction to jury - Judge not directing jury as to meaning of elements of offence of theft - Judge not directing jury as to possibility of defence not arising from defendant's evidence - Adequacy of directions.
In a case where, against a background of late banking of sums received at the shop at which the defendant was employed, it had been unnecessary for the judge to direct the jury as to the meaning of dishonesty, appropriation and intention to deprive permanently at the defendant's trial for theft in respect of sums which had not been banked at all. Further, it had been unnecessary to direct the jury as the possibility of a defence not arising on the defendant's evidence.
- 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