Law Report: Justice requires murder case re-trial: Regina v Kennedy - Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) (Lord Taylor of Gosforth, Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Judge and Mr Justice Hidden), 19 February 1993
The Court of Appeal ordered a retrial of a charge of murder against the appellant, Malcolm Goodbarn Kennedy.
The appellant was charged with murdering a prisoner sharing his police cell on 24 December 1990. The prosecution relied on scientific evidence concerning both the deceased's and appellant's clothing. The defence was that a police officer had killed the deceased and, relying on discrepancies in police records and evidence, contended the police had organised a cover-up to use the appellant as a scapegoat. In September 1991 the appellant was convicted.
Subsequently evidence was obtained which suggested a discrepancy in the police and documentary evidence. The Court of Appeal granted the appellant leave to appeal out of time.
The Crown argued the fresh evidence demonstrated sloppiness in police procedures but did not cast doubt on the jury's verdict. The appellant submitted, given the defence of a police cover-up, the evidence might have caused the jury to have doubts about the appellant's guilt and the conviction should be quashed.
Michael Mansfield QC and Dora Belford (Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for the appellant; Timothy Langdale QC and Nigel Sweeney (CPS) for the Crown.
LORD TAYLOR CJ, giving the judgment of the court, said that, having considered the further evidence and arguments, the court was unable to say that it could be sure that, had the jury heard the evidence, it would not have affected its verdict. The court could not say the verdict was safe and satisfactory. The whole of the evidence, including the further material, merited the consideration of a fresh jury. Onerous through it would be for all concerned, this was a case in which the interests of justice required that a re-trial was ordered.
The court emphasised that, in ordering a re-trial, it was not passing any judgment on the rival contentions argued. It would be quite wrong for the court to indicate a view one way or the other. That was the function of a jury. The appeal was allowed, the conviction quashed and a re-trial ordered.
Diving in at the deep end is no excuse for shirking the style stakes
- 1 Why I'm on the brink of burning my Israeli passport
- 2 Japanese plant experts produce 10,000 lettuce heads a day in LED-lit indoor farm
- 3 War is war: Why I stand with Israel
- 4 L'Oreal cuts ties with Belgium supporter Axelle Despiegelaere after hunting trip photographs
- 5 The true Gaza back-story that the Israelis aren’t telling this week
Israel-Gaza conflict: Death toll tops 125 after overnight raids as Operation Protective Edge continues
Game of Thrones author George RR Martin says 'f*** you' to fans who fear he will die before finishing Westeros saga
Ian Thorpe gay: Olympic swimmer comes out in Parkinson interview
Supermoon 2014: When and why will the moon look bigger and brighter this summer?
Gaza-Israel conflict: Pro-Palestinian demonstrators take to streets of London, Paris and New York in wave of protests
Sustained immigration has not harmed Britons' employment, say government advisers
War is war: Why I stand with Israel
7/7 memorial defaced on anniversary of 2005 attacks with ‘Blair lied thousands died’ graffiti
Australia facing international condemnation after turning around Sri Lankans at sea
Even when it brutalises one of its own teenage citizens, America is helpless against Israel
Socialist Worker called to apologise over ‘vile’ article saying Eton schoolboy Horatio Chapple's death is ‘reason to save the polar bears’
£70000 per annum: Harrington Starr: Information Security Manager (ISO 27001, A...
£30000 - £45000 per annum + Benefits + Bonus: Harrington Starr: C# Developer (...
£60000 - £80000 per annum + Benefits + Bonus: Harrington Starr: C# Integration...
£75000 - £85000 per annum + ex bens: Deerfoot IT Resources Limited: Biztalk Te...