The nature of any objectionable remarks by the prosecutor, the strength of the Crown case, the extent of any attention by the trial judge to rectifying the matter, and whether or not the defence sought the discharge of the jury, are all relevant considerations in assessing whether there is a real risk that the prosecutor's remarks wrongly influenced the verdict.
Jersey CJ
Where a prosecutor exceeds the bounds of proper comment in closing address, the conviction will stand if the appellate court is satisfied there is no real risk the remarks wrongly influenced the verdict, assessed by reference to the nature of the remarks, the strength of the Crown case, the trial judge's corrective directions, and whether defence counsel sought discharge of the jury. Strong corrective directions by the trial judge, combined with a Crown case of some strength and defence counsel's failure to seek discharge, will ordinarily negate the risk of a miscarriage of justice.
No headnote yet — we'll generate the full structured AI headnote for you.
Generate the headnoteFree trial · no card required
Legal principles extracted from this case
Cases that have considered R v Allouche
Referred to (1)
Judicial Consideration (Chronological)