||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 175 (Jun)
||Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Hooper LJ, Grigson J and Sir Charles Mantell
||Sarah Porter (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for the defendant.
||Robert Pettit (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the Crown.
||17 June 2005
Criminal evidence and procedure - Evidence - Fresh evidence on appeal - Trial judge's refusal to adjourn trial for defence to call witnesses - Defence responsibility for failure to prepare case - Apparently credible evidence - Interests of justice - Conviction unsafe.
In the circumstances of the instant case, notwithstanding the fact that the failure to call witnesses as to the defendant's alibi had been, in part, the fault of the defendant or his solicitors in failing to get the information to counsel in time, the evidence would be received in the interests of justice. The evidence, which the prosecution had not contended was incapable of belief, showed that the defendant's account had been, or might have been, true, and the convictions for robbery would be quashed and a retrial ordered.
- 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