Issa Seed & Ors v R
[2024] EWCA Crim 650
R v ARU & Ors
11 October 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 1101
Court of Appeal
Three young men were accused of murder and attempted murder after a fight involving knives. The judge said there wasn't enough evidence to convict them, and a higher court agreed. To be guilty, they would have needed to agree to a knife fight beforehand or during the fight – like a duel – and there was no proof of this. The court explained that spontaneous violence between groups of young people, even if knives are involved, usually doesn't lead to murder charges unless there's clear evidence of a deal to fight with knives.
Key Facts
- •Four young males (ARU, AOC, BHL, and TC) were charged with murder (count 1), manslaughter (count 2), attempted murder (count 3), causing grievous bodily harm with intent (count 4), and violent disorder (count 5).
- •The trial judge ruled there was no case to answer for ARU, AOC, and BHL on counts 1-4.
- •The prosecution appealed this ruling.
- •The incident involved two groups of young males; one including ARU, AOC, and BHL, and the other including Athif Habimana.
- •A fistfight occurred between members of the groups, followed by a more serious confrontation where Habimana was killed and ARU was stabbed.
- •The prosecution's case was entirely circumstantial, relying on CCTV footage, mobile phone data, and messages.
- •The defendants possessed knives, and messages sent by AOC were interpreted as provocative and threatening.
- •There was no direct evidence of a pre-arranged fight or a spontaneous agreement to engage in mutual stabbing.
Legal Principles
Test for granting leave to appeal against a 'no case to answer' ruling.
Section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, ATT [2024] EWCA Crim 460, B [2008] EWCA Crim 1144, A [2008] EWCA Crim 2186
Jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal to reverse a 'no case to answer' ruling.
Section 67 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
Principles of joint enterprise liability, particularly in cases involving reciprocal agreements to engage in violence (e.g., a duel or shoot-out).
Gnango [2011] UKSC 59, R v Jogee [2016] 1 Cr App R 31, Morgan [2021] EWCA Crim 895, Seed and others [2024] EWCA Crim 650, Riley and Robinson [2018] EWCA Crim 1000
Outcomes
The Court of Appeal dismissed the prosecution's appeal.
The court found that the trial judge's ruling that there was no case to answer was reasonably open to him on the evidence. There was insufficient evidence to establish an agreement, either pre-arranged or spontaneous, between the defendants and Athif's group to engage in mutual stabbing.
The defendants were acquitted on counts 1-4.
The evidence did not support the prosecution's case of a pre-arranged or spontaneous agreement to engage in a reciprocal knife fight.