R v Bentley (Deceased)
Derek Bentley's conviction for murder, for which he was hanged in 1953, was quashed posthumously because the trial judge's summing up was so unfair that he was denied a fair trial.
Facts
In 1952, Derek Bentley, aged 19, and Christopher Craig, aged 16, attempted to break into a warehouse in Croydon. When the police arrived, Bentley was arrested, and Craig shot and killed a police officer. Bentley was alleged to have shouted let him have it, Chris before the shooting. Both were convicted of murder. Craig was too young to be executed, but Bentley, who had learning difficulties, was hanged in 1953. After a long campaign by his family, the case was referred to the Court of Appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal quashed the conviction. Lord Bingham CJ said that the summing up of the trial judge, Lord Goddard CJ, was such as to deny Bentley the fair trial which is the birthright of every British citizen, because it was highly prejudicial, praised the police witnesses and disparaged the defence, and failed to direct the jury properly on the burden and standard of proof and on the law of joint enterprise. The court applied the standards of fairness of its own time, and it was not necessary to decide whether Bentley was in fact innocent. The case was one of the first referred by the Commission.
Related cases on appeals and miscarriages of justice
- R (Adams) v Secretary of State for Justice [2011] UKSC 18, [2012] 1 AC 48
- R (Hallam) v Secretary of State for Justice [2019] UKSC 2, [2020] AC 279
- R v Cannings [2004] EWCA Crim 1
- R v Chalkley [1998] QB 848
- R v Clark (Sally) [2003] EWCA Crim 1020
- R v Cooper [1969] 1 QB 267
- R v Dallagher [2002] EWCA Crim 1903
- R v Dunlop [2006] EWCA Crim 1354, [2007] 1 WLR 1657
Studying criminal procedure? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
