Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

R v John Allcock & Anor

5 September 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 1010
Court of Appeal
Two guys were caught running a huge drug operation. Even though there were problems with the police investigation, the court said the evidence was enough to convict them, and their sentences were fair.

Key Facts

  • John Allcock (JA) and Carl McAlindon (CM) convicted of conspiracy to supply Class A and B drugs.
  • JA also convicted of converting criminal property; CM convicted of possessing criminal property.
  • JA sentenced to 21 years, CM to 13 years imprisonment.
  • Appeals against conviction and (JA only) sentence.
  • Case involved two organised crime groups supplying cocaine and amphetamine.
  • Evidence included guilty pleas of co-defendants, drug seizures, phone and cell site evidence, observation evidence, DNA evidence, EncroChat material, and financial evidence.
  • Defence challenged phone attribution, police investigation integrity, and reliability of evidence.
  • Issues with late disclosure of evidence, police misconduct (DS Malcolm plagiarising report), and potential expert witness influence.
  • Jury issues: one juror discharged due to illness, another briefly upset.
  • EncroChat evidence admitted as bad character evidence for JA, but not CM.

Legal Principles

Admissibility of bad character evidence.

R v A, B, D and C [2021] EWCA Crim 128; R v A & Others EWCA Crim 1447

Inconsistency of jury verdicts.

Longman and Cribben (1981) 72 Cr. App. R. 121

Standard of proof in criminal cases.

Abuse of process.

Section 78 PACE 1984 (exclusion of evidence).

Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984

Good character direction.

Hunter (Nigel) & others [2015] EWCA Crim 631

Sentencing guidelines for drug offences.

Sentencing Council guidelines

Section 33 Sentencing Act 2020 (pre-sentence reports).

Sentencing Act 2020

Outcomes

Appeals against conviction dismissed.

No merit found in grounds of appeal; despite various issues, the trial remained fair.

Appeal against sentence (JA) dismissed.

Sentence of 21 years not manifestly excessive given JA's leading role and the scale of the operation.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.