Criminal evidence

The defendant was charged with causing death by dangerous driving. The prosecution had called evidence about his alleged bad driving on previous occasions.

HELD Many judges would have taken the view that they would not admit such evidence because of the risk of the trial and the summing up becoming unduly complicated by collateral issues.

However, it cannot be said to have been wrong in principle or perverse to conclude that the evidence could be regarded as tending to show that the appellant had a propensity to drive in an aggressive and impatient manner which involved taking dangerous risks (to fall within s 103 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003) and that the evidence was relevant to an important matter in issue between the parties to be admissible under s 101(1)(d).

The Court of Appeal will not interfere with a ruling as to admissibility of evidence of a defendant’s bad character unless the judge’s judgment as to the capacity of prior events to establish propensity is plainly wrong, or discretion to exclude under s 101(3) has been exercised unreasonably in the Wednesbury sense. However, “there is much to be said for trial judges doing all in their power to ensure that cases are tightly focused on the essential issues” (Lord Justice Toulson at para 28).