R v Clarke [2013]

Facts

• Clarke (2 defendants) assaulted the victim, who had osteoporosis
• Clarke attempted to resuscitate the victim following the assault
• Medical evidence suggested that the cause of the victims resulting death was the damage to his ribs sustained during the resuscitation attempts

Issue

• Could the conviction be quashed on the basis that the judge said in writing that it was not for the jury to decide whether the cause of death was a substantial cause?

Decision

• No, conviction secure

Reasoning

• The judge was wrong to say what he said in writing; it is for the jury to decide whether the defendant caused death
• The conviction was secure however, as the judge correctly stated the jury requirement orally, and also stated orally that his written notes were not guidance on the law
• The judge was entitled to rule that a ‘expert’ was not sufficiently credible to give evidence