Guilty verdicts on two counts of rape were not so inconsistent with acquittals on associated counts, concerning abduction and the administration of drugs, as to render the convictions unsafe. Although the Crown had linked the counts in putting its case, that was not binding on the jury’s verdict. The jury directions had been clear and detailed and the jury could convict on the rape counts irrespective of their decision on the other counts.
A sentence of six years’ imprisonment imposed on a mother for causing the death of her child by deliberately administering adult drugs when aware of the risk involved was not manifestly excessive given the sustained, determined and persistent course of conduct undertaken for purely selfish reasons.
The appellants’ convictions for manslaughter, for their acts of preparing and passing heroin to an addict who then self-administered the drug and died, were quashed in light of the decision in R. v Kennedy (Simon)  UKHL 38,  1 A.C. 269.
Convictions for manslaughter and escape were quashed where there had been recent clarification of the law in relation to both offences and the appellants had pleaded guilty on what had emerged to be a fallacious basis.
Where an offender had been involved in the supply of a controlled drug that was then self-administered by the person to whom it was supplied, resulting in their death, it was appropriate to find the offender guilty of manslaughter if the jury was satisfied that, when the drug was handed by the offender to the deceased “for immediate injection”, both parties were engaged in the one activity of administering the drug.