header-logo header-logo

Criminal evidence

01 May 2008
Issue: 7319 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-detail

R v McKenzie [2008] EWCA Crim 758, [2008] All ER (D) 157 (Apr)

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).

Issue: 7319 / Categories: Case law , Law digest
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll