R v McKechnie ; R v Gibbons ; R v Dixon
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 25 July 1991 |
| Date | 25 July 1991 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
Court of Appeal
Before Lord Justice Watkins, Mr Justice Auld and Mr Justice Judge
Criminal procedure - appeals - inconsistency of verdicts
On an appeal against conviction on the ground of inconsistency of verdicts the court would intervene only where the appellant established that no reasonable jury could properly have reached the verdicts which were reached, but it did not necessarily follow that all guilty verdicts on one side or the other of the inconsistency would be quashed.
The Court of Appeal so stated when giving a reserved judgment on appeals against convictions at the Central Criminal Court in December 1989 before Sir James Miskin, QC, then Recorder of London, and a jury by Roy Maurer McKechnie, aged 25, of manslaughter by provocation and Errol Anthony Gibbons, aged 23, and Andrew Tony Dixon, aged 20, each of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to Herbert Francis Kelly, aged 66, contrary to section 18 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861.
In upholding the manslaughter conviction and quashing the section 18 convictions the court added cautionarywords about the provision of a written list of questions to a jury.
McKechnie was sentenced to seven years imprisonment for manslaughter and two years consecutive for criminal damage. Gibbons received four years for the section 18 offence and two years consecutive for criminal damage. Dixon was sentenced to detention in a young offender institution for four years for the section 18 offence and two years consecutive for criminal damage.
All appellants had pleaded guilty to criminal damage. On appeal, there having been no evidence of the value of the damage involved, the sentences on Gibbons and Dixon were reduced to three months in accordance with section 33 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980. The two-year sentence on McKechnie was ordered to run concurrently with the seven years.
Mr Jeffrey Pegden for McKechnie, Mr Icah Peart for Gibbons and Mr Anthony Abell for Dixon, all assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals; Mr Graham Boal for the Crown.
MR JUSTICE AULD, giving the judgment of the court, said that the three appellants entered Mr Kelly's home and McKechnie unaided by the other two savagely attacked Kelly, causing him severe brain damage and also damage to some of his belongings. A good deal of damage was done to the contents of his home.
Kelly, who was deeply unconscious...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Osland v R
-
R v Adewuyi (Adebowale Kazem)
... ... In his submission Mr Drew cites two cases: Drury (1971) 56 Cr.App.R 104 and McKechnie (1991) 94 Cr.App.R 51. Thus in Drury the appellant had been acquitted of one count of theft of 28 ... ...
-
R v Raymond George May
... ... Reliance was also placed on Olubitan [2003] EWCA Crim 2940 and on McKechnie and others [2002] EWCA Crim 3161 , a conspiracy case where confiscation orders had been made under ... ...
-
R v Adam Umerji
... ... the lack of evidence from the committal proceedings to support an additional count in R v Dixon (1991) 92 Cr. App. R. 43 ... 86 But as Mr Perry pointed out, there are some defects ... ...