R v Ellis

This appeal concerns the conviction of the appellant, by majority verdict of a jury, for the crime of endangering life. The appellant had fired shots into a house, one of which penetrated a window, narrowly missing a person inside. The prosecution case was that the appellant had fired the shots with the intent to endanger life, or had been recklessly indifferent to the risk of doing so. The evidence against the appellant was largely circumstantial. The jury heard evidence of a series of police interviews with the appellant, in which he told a number of lies. The prosecution argued that these lies were indicative of guilt. The appellant did not give evidence. The trial judge gave a summing up to the jury, in which he addressed the issue of the lies told by the appellant and the failure of the appellant to give evidence. The appellant appealed against his conviction, arguing that the summing up contained several errors. The appeal was allowed by the Court of Criminal Appeal, on the basis that the summing up contained an inadequate direction regarding the lies told by the appellant, and unduly emphasised the significance of the appellant's failure to give evidence. The conviction was quashed and a retrial ordered. The court held that the direction regarding the lies told by the appellant was inadequate because it did not identify the specific lies that were capable of supporting an inference of guilt, and did not explain that such lies could be explained in ways that were not consistent with guilt. The court also held that the summing up unduly emphasised the significance of the appellant's failure to give evidence, by occupying a significant portion of the summing up and suggesting that the failure strengthened the prosecution case. The court held that these errors gave rise to a real risk of a miscarriage of justice.