R v Mohammed Riasat Malik
[2024] EWCA Crim 292
Mukeh Joseph Kawa & Anor v R
14 July 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 845
Court of Appeal
Two men were convicted of murder. They appealed, saying evidence of them having knives before was unfairly used against them. The court said the evidence was used to show who *actually* had the murder weapon, not to say they were generally bad people. The appeals failed because the evidence was used fairly.
Key Facts
- •Djojo Nsaka was stabbed to death on January 20, 2017.
- •Mukeh Kawa and Donald Davies were convicted of murder in August 2017.
- •They were sentenced to life imprisonment.
- •Their co-defendant, Ali Tas, was acquitted of murder but convicted of manslaughter.
- •Kawa and Davies applied for extensions of time to appeal their convictions, significantly delayed.
- •The appeals centered on the admissibility of bad character evidence under sections 101 and 103 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
- •The bad character evidence included previous convictions for possessing offensive weapons and a recent purchase of knife blocks.
- •The prosecution argued the evidence was relevant to whether the applicants possessed knives during the stabbing and knew if the co-accused had a knife.
- •The defense argued the evidence was improperly used to establish a propensity to carry knives and was prejudicial.
- •The trial judge admitted the evidence, and his directions to the jury on the evidence were challenged on appeal.
Legal Principles
Evidence of a defendant's bad character is admissible if relevant to an important matter in issue between the defendant and the prosecution (s101(1)(d), Criminal Justice Act 2003).
Criminal Justice Act 2003, s101(1)(d)
The court can exclude evidence under s101(1)(d) or (g) if admission would adversely affect the fairness of proceedings (s101(3), Criminal Justice Act 2003).
Criminal Justice Act 2003, s101(3)
Matters in issue include whether the defendant has a propensity to commit offences of the kind charged (s103(1)(a), Criminal Justice Act 2003). However, past conduct can be relevant even without showing a propensity.
Criminal Justice Act 2003, s103(1)(a)
A direction that the jury must be sure of a propensity before using bad character evidence is only needed if a relevant propensity is alleged.
R v Mitchell [2016] UKSC 55
Outcomes
Appeals dismissed.
The bad character evidence was relevant to the key issue of who brought the knife to the scene and whether the applicants knew each other's possession of knives. The judge's directions, while containing a minor inaccuracy, were sufficient and did not render the convictions unsafe.
Applications for extensions of time refused.
The grounds of appeal were not arguable, rendering the extension of time applications moot.