R v Chevathen & Dorrick

The case of R v Chevathen & Dorrick involved the convictions of a mother and her stepfather for the murder of their four-year-old daughter, who died from fatal head injuries consistent with repeated blows to the head. The primary legal issues before the court were whether each appellant had individually or in combination killed the deceased with the requisite intention, or if each appellant had knowledge of the other’s requisite intent. Additionally, the court examined whether there were any errors in the admission or rejection of evidence, and if there were any misdirections or non-directions given to the jury.

The court determined that there were several critical errors in the trial. Firstly, the appellants had lied about how the child received her fatal injuries, and the circumstances under which such evidence could be led were mishandled. While an Edwards direction was not necessary, the court held that a direction should have been given against the danger of concluding that a person must be guilty because they have told lies. This was considered in light of previous cases such as Richens, Zoneff, and Broadhurst. The court also found that evidence of uncharged acts of violence towards the child by both appellants was rightly admitted as relationship evidence and as relevant to the issue of intent, but the jury should have been warned against the possible misuse of such evidence, especially in an emotive case.

Furthermore, the court found that the trial judge failed to adequately present the defence case, and it was necessary to distinguish between evidence of callousness and specific intent to cause grievous bodily harm. The court concluded that these errors were significant and warranted a new trial.

The appeals were allowed, the convictions set aside, and a new trial was ordered. This outcome reflects the court's finding that the errors in the trial were substantial enough to undermine the fairness and reliability of the original verdict.