ADEQUACY OF SUMMING UP

A judge had not erred when summing up

[2013] EWCA Crim 2041

Where a judge had been entitled to allow certain DNA evidence, and the interpretation of it by the Crown’s witness, to go before a jury, and his summing up in respect of that evidence had been adequate, there was no reason to doubt the safety of the appellant’s convictions for possession of a prohibited firearm and causing grievous bodily harm.

[2011] EWCA Crim 1295

The criticisms of the summing up in a murder case were unfounded and overall the summing up was a clear and careful analysis of the evidence. The conviction was safe and soundly based on the evidence before the court.

[2010] EWCA Crim 2972

Convictions for rape and grievous bodily harm were safe where the jury had reached their verdicts having heard all the evidence and having been sufficiently directed in the summing up.

[2003] EWCA Crim 3184

The trial judge had not directed the jury that a person might be dishonest, for the purposes of an offence of false accounting, as a consequence of recklessness and the appellant’s conviction was safe.

[2003] EWCA Crim 3031

Where there was a cut-throat defence and similar questions arose in respect of each defendant, it was desirable to assist the jury by relating those questions specifically to the case advanced by each defendant. However, where the ingredients of the defence and matters on which the jury had to be satisfied were made clear, and the evidence of each defendant was fully re-canvassed before the jury, a failure to relate the questions specifically to each defendant would not necessarily render a conviction unsafe.