8. Response to appeal papers (The Hon. Mr. Justice Dyson)
 

The single judge who looked at the appeal papers (the first stage of the appeal process) refused leave to appeal against conviction. His reasons for this were stated as follows:-

    ‘I have considered the papers in your case and your grounds of appeal.

    The passage to which objection is taken is unexceptionable. I note that leading counsel for the applicant was invited by the recorder to say whether he had any objection to the (then proposed) passage and he said he had none.

    No doubt, all the points made in the advice on appeal as to the weakness in the prosecution case were made to the jury by counsel, and no complaint is made about the accuracy or fairness of the summing up. The question of the precise time when the killer drove the car away from the scene was always going to be a matter of speculation. It is difficult to see in what material respect the trial would have taken a different course if the prosecution had suggested that the applicant had driven the car away some time after the murder’.

But… the precise timing when the car was taken is of immense importance and, when the fibre evidence is accurately analysed, it becomes obvious that John could not have buried fibre shedding clothes, then returned to the scene in the same fibre shedding clothes and removed the car! This is such an obvious and crucial point, clearly outlined in the appeal papers, which again has been misunderstood by a judge! (See appendix 6)

Judgement on the appeal. (No: 99/7533/W2)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice
The Strand
London WC2

Monday 2nd October 2000

B E F O R E :

LORD JUSTICE KAY MR JUSTICE SILBER

and

HIS HONOUR JUDGE MELLOR (Sitting as a Judge of the CACD)

JUDGMENT (As approved by the Court) Please see attached copy (PDF format).