Nardis Maynard v The King (St Christopher and Nevis)
[2024] UKPC 24
Malik Cox v The King (Turks and Caicos Islands)
31 January 2023
[2023] UKPC 4
Privy Council
A man was convicted of murder. His appeal argued that two key witnesses were unreliable. The judges agreed that the witnesses had some problems with their testimony, but the main trial judge had seen and heard the witnesses and believed them; so the higher courts let the conviction stand.
Key Facts
- •Andreika Stubbs was shot and killed outside the Versace Club in Providenciales.
- •Malik Cox was charged with her murder and found guilty by Aziz J.
- •The appeal focuses on the credibility of prosecution witnesses Anthony Francis and Tyrone Smith.
- •Anthony Francis had an undertaking with the prosecution, offering immunity in exchange for testimony against Cox.
- •Tyrone Smith initially denied knowing the shooter but later identified Cox.
- •Cox chose not to give evidence at trial.
Legal Principles
Appellate courts should afford deference to trial judges' findings of fact, especially regarding witness credibility, due to their advantage in observing witnesses' demeanor.
Beacon Insurance Co Ltd v Maharaj Bookstore Ltd [2014] UKPC 21; R v Crawford (Cayman Islands) [2015] UKPC 44
The Privy Council respects factual circumstances peculiar to the country of origin, recognizing lower courts' better position to assess such circumstances.
Dass v Marchand [2021] UKPC 2; Sancus Financial Holdings Ltd v Holm (Practice Note) [2022] UKPC 41
The Court of Appeal should allow an appeal if the verdict is unreasonable, unsupported by evidence, based on a wrong decision of law, or resulted in a miscarriage of justice. The Privy Council reviews if the Court of Appeal was entitled to reach its decision.
Section 7(1) of the Court of Appeal Ordinance (Turks and Caicos Islands)
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The Court of Appeal's decision upholding Aziz J's conviction was reasonable. The trial judge's assessment of witness credibility, while acknowledging the undertaking's potential influence, was within his purview and not unreasonable.
Ground 1 (credibility of Anthony Francis) failed.
While the undertaking was problematic, the judge's self-direction on caution and his assessment of Francis's credibility were not unreasonable. The Court of Appeal correctly deferred to the trial judge's assessment.
Ground 2 (credibility of Tyrone Smith) failed.
The trial judge's assessment of Smith's credibility and his explanation for the delay in identifying Cox were reasonable and within his purview. The Court of Appeal properly deferred to this assessment.