R v George Henry Knights
[2023] EWCA Crim 895
Jaden Drake & Anor v R
4 December 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 1454
Court of Appeal
Two men were convicted of murder. They appealed, arguing they acted in self-defense and lost control. The court said there wasn't enough evidence to support the 'loss of control' argument, but the judge was wrong about how the men got the murder weapon, so their sentences were reduced.
Key Facts
- •Jaden Drake (24) and Igors Andersons (19) convicted of murder.
- •Christian Patru stabbed to death in his flat.
- •Appellants appealed against conviction and sentence.
- •Ground of appeal: Judge's refusal to leave partial defence of loss of control to the jury.
- •Appellants' defence: Self-defence; Patru was the aggressor.
- •Judge rejected loss of control defence; found insufficient evidence.
- •Appeals court reviewed the judge's application of the loss of control test.
- •Judge's sentencing considered Schedule 21 of the Sentencing Act 2020, initially setting a 25-year minimum term based on the use of a knife taken to the scene.
- •Appeals court questioned the judge's finding that appellants brought the knife to the scene.
- •Appeals court adjusted sentences.
Legal Principles
Three-stage test for loss of control defence (s.54 Coroners and Justice Act 2009): Loss of self-control; Qualifying trigger; Reasonable reaction.
Coroners and Justice Act 2009, ss. 54 and 55
Judge's role in evaluating loss of control evidence: Rigorous evaluation; Common sense judgment; Consideration of all evidence.
R v Clinton [2012] EWCA Crim 2; R v Gurpinar [2015] EWCA Crim 178; R v Goodwin [2018] EWCA Crim 2287
Sufficient evidence for loss of control: Evidence from any source; Jury's role in accepting evidence; Not solely reliant on defendant's assertion.
R v Gurpinar [2015] EWCA Crim 178; R v Goodwin [2018] EWCA Crim 2287
Distinction between self-defence and loss of control: Factual overlap but distinct defences.
R v Dawes [2013] EWCA Crim 322
Sentencing principles under Schedule 21 of the Sentencing Act 2020 for murder involving knives.
Sentencing Act 2020, Schedule 21
Outcomes
Appeals against conviction dismissed.
Insufficient evidence to support loss of control defence.
Appeals against sentence allowed.
Judge's finding that appellants brought the knife to the scene lacked sufficient evidential basis; original sentences deemed manifestly excessive.