R v N J a No. Sccrm-01-353

The appellant appeals against his convictions of murder, wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm and attempted armed robbery. The convictions arose from an incident where the appellant and two others attempted to rob two men, resulting in one man being fatally stabbed and the other seriously injured. The appellant contends that the trial judge erred in failing to leave the defence of self-defence to the jury, and that the trial judge's direction on causation was inappropriate. The Court of Criminal Appeal found that the trial judge properly exercised his discretion in not leaving the defence of self-defence to the jury, as the evidence did not support a reasonable possibility that the appellant genuinely believed his actions were necessary and reasonable in self-defence. Regarding causation, the Court found the trial judge's direction was proper, as the presentation of the knife could be seen as an act of violence causing the victim's death. The appeal was dismissed.

In this case, the appellant was convicted of murder, wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm, and attempted armed robbery. The appellant and two others had attempted to rob two men, resulting in one fatality and one seriously injured. The appellant argued that the trial judge should have left the defence of self-defence to the jury and that the trial judge's direction on causation was incorrect. The Court of Criminal Appeal found that the trial judge correctly exercised his discretion in not leaving the defence of self-defence to the jury, as the evidence did not support a reasonable possibility that the appellant genuinely believed his actions were necessary and reasonable in self-defence. The Court also found the trial judge's direction on causation to be proper, as the presentation of the knife could be seen as an act of violence causing the victim's death. The appeal was dismissed.