R v Wang
A judge can never direct a jury to convict, even where there appears to be no defence.
Facts
Mr Wang, a Buddhist, was found carrying a sword and a knife in a shoulder bag at Bridgwater railway station. He was charged with having bladed articles in a public place, contrary to section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. He said that he carried them for religious reasons and for self defence. The judge ruled that he had no defence of good reason or religious reason in law, and directed the jury to convict him, which they did.
Legal principle
The House of Lords quashed the conviction. There are no circumstances in which a judge is entitled to direct a jury to return a verdict of guilty, however strong the evidence. The jury's role is to decide whether the prosecution has proved its case, and the defendant has a right to have the jury decide that question, even if the judge thinks that the only possible verdict is guilty. The House approved DPP v Stonehouse [1978] AC 55 on this point.
Related cases on juries
- Attorney General v Dallas [2012] EWHC 156 (Admin), [2012] 1 WLR 991
- Attorney General v Fraill [2011] EWCA Crim 1570, [2012] 1 Cr App R 1
- Bushell's Case (1670) Vaughan 135
- Gregory v United Kingdom (1998) 25 EHRR 577
- Hanif and Khan v United Kingdom (2012) 55 EHRR 16
- R v Abdroikov [2007] UKHL 37, [2007] 1 WLR 2679
- R v Ford [1989] QB 868
- R v Karakaya [2005] EWCA Crim 346, [2005] 2 Cr App R 5
Studying english legal system? 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.
