R v O'Boyle
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 30 July 1990 |
| Date | 30 July 1990 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
Court of Appeal
Before Lord Lane, Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Rose and Mr Justice Tucker
Criminal procedure - confession - judge's threat
In a case described as wholly exceptional if not unique by the Lord Chief Justice, the Court of Appeal in a reserved judgment quashed convictions of a man sentenced to concurrent terms of 18 years imprisonment after a 34-day trial for conspiracy to be knowingly concerned in the importation of cocaine and conspiracy to supply cocaine.
John Joseph O'Boyle, aged 51, an equipment dealer, was convicted at the Central Criminal Court before Judge Richardson, QC, and a jury on November 25, 1988 on count 1 charging conspiracy to contravene section 170 of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 and section 3 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, contrary to section 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977, as substituted by section 5 of the Criminal Attempts Act 1981, and count 2 charging conspiracy to contravene section 4(3)(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, contrary to section 1(1) of the 1971 Act as substituted.
Co-accused, David Philip Raftrey, aged 40, of Lincoln Avenue, Twickenham, who was convicted on count 2, was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment.
Mr Stephen Solley, QC, who did not appear below, and Mrs Laura Cox, assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals, for the appellant; Mr Roy Amlot, QC and Mr Peter Grieves-Smith for the Crown.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE, giving the judgment of the court, said that a man named David Wesley Medin was arrested as he travelled by taxi from Grays, Essex to London. He had in his possession a suitcase containing 36kg of almost pure cocaine, worth about £10,000,000.
It was not long before he admitted his part in a wide ranging conspiracy to import large quantities of cocaine from South America to the United Kingdom and elsewhere in Europe. He named others who, according to him, were involved, one of them being the appellant.
Medin was charged with conspiracy to import and also conspiracy to supply cocaine. He pleaded guilty to both counts on April 27, 1987 and was sentenced to nine years imprisonment concurrent on each, later reduced on appeal to six years. He gave evidence at the appellant's trial and was the mainstay of the prosecution's case.
The cocaine which he was carrying was part of a consignment which had been flown into Heathrow in December 1986, concealed in bulldozer push-arms, which had been successfully cleared through customs by the appellant.
The prosecution case was that the appellant, who had extensive contacts in South America had organized the supply and packing and shipping. He had, admittedly, legitimate experience in dealing in heavy machinery.
Medin's role was financial and administrative.
One of the others involved was named McNeil, who alerted the authorities and brought the conspiracy to an end. He was granted immunity from prosecution as an informant. Another was Raftrey, who, because of his connection with the European drug world, had been recruited by Medin.
Raftrey's defence was that he had been threatened by the appellant, feared for his life because of those threats and because of the appellant's connection with the Mafia. His defence was weakened by his having had some
connection at least with the conspirators before any question of duress could have arisen.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- DPP v Cummins
- R v Myers
-
The Queen v Pamphill Prevost Simon Power Shawn Henry
...approach, discussed at D11.73. 19 Similar sentiments were expressed in the case of R. v John Joseph O'Boyle, by the Court of Appeal (1991) 92 Cr. App. R. 202 at 206 where the following was stated:- Mr. Solley for the appellant concedes that in the light of the authorities, and in particular......
-
Carter et Al v The State
...in Josephs, the Court of Appeal has shown that it is willing to intervene “where something has clearly gone wrong” [O'Boyle [1991] 92 Cr. App. R. 202], but we cannot emphasise enough that an appellate court will be very slow to interfere with such a decision unless it can be shown that the......
-
Subject Index
...(1977) 65 Cr App R 304 ... 169R v Noonan [2003] EWCA Crim 3869.................................................... 116R v O’Boyle (1991) 92 Cr App R 202........................................... 169, 176R v O’Brien [2003] EWCA Crim 1370............................................ 111, 116R......
-
Defensive Use of a Co-Accused's Confession and the Criminal Justice Act 2003
...App R 573,R v Randall [2004] 1 WLR 56.13 For example, Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, s. 41(1).14 See e.g. R v O’Boyle (1991) 92 Cr App R 202, and R v Clare [1995] Crim LR 726.15 See I. Dennis, ‘Miscarriages of Justice and the Law of Confessions: Evidentiary Issues andSolution......