Scott Alan May v Regina

Scott Alan May was convicted of the murder of a woman and subsequently appealed the decision. The appeal centred on several legal issues, including the reasonableness of the verdict in light of the evidence presented, the potential misdirection of the jury during the summing up phase, and the correctness of the trial judge's decision not to leave the extended joint criminal enterprise and manslaughter alternatives to the jury. The court had to determine whether the trial judge erred in his directions to the jury, particularly in relation to the joint criminal enterprise charge, and whether the evidence was sufficient to support the key witness's account.

The court examined the trial judge's directions to the jury and found that there was no misdirection. The judge had correctly explained the principles of joint criminal enterprise and ensured the jury understood the necessity of foresight of a criminal act as a basis for the charge. The court also considered the sufficiency of the evidence, particularly in relation to the key witness's account, and concluded that the evidence was capable of supporting the witness's testimony. The court found that the verdict was not unreasonable and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.

The appeal was ultimately dismissed, with the court confirming the conviction. The trial judge's directions to the jury were deemed correct, and the evidence was found to be adequate to support the key witness's account. The court held that the verdict was not unreasonable on the evidence, and there was no misdirection in the summing up phase. The court also found that there was no error in not leaving the extended joint criminal enterprise and manslaughter alternatives to the jury. The conviction was upheld, and the appeal was dismissed.