QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
B e f o r e :
MR JUSTICE SILBER
|DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS||(RESPONDENT)|
Smith Bernal Wordwave Limited
190 Fleet Street London EC4A 2AG
Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Fax No: 020 7831 8838
(Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)
MR A MALIK (instructed by CPS Buckinghamshire) appeared on behalf of the RESPONDENT
Crown Copyright ©
"... whether the decision of this Court on 11th November 2002 that the Appellant was guilty of receiving stolen goods was wrong in law in that there was no evidence that the Appellant was in possession or in control of the stolen property in question and that in our finding he had the requisite mens rea was not based on evidence that could reasonably give rise to such a conclusion".
The question therefore consisted of two parts, one of which was whether the respondent had failed to establish the actus reus of handling stolen goods. That point has not been pursued before us. The second question that was raised was whether the findings of fact were sufficient to establish the appellant had the requisite mens rea for the offence.
"We were of opinion that the Appellant was one of the three men involved as he was found standing in the alleyway by the duvet cover; his brother had signalled to him having just left the alleyway; he knew the contents of the duvet cover were stolen because by his actions he sought to conceal the fact from the police."
The next sentence is one on which Mr Polson places great reliance in support of his contention that there was erroneous reasoning because the case stated then says:
"... he failed to provide any evidence from any witnesses to give any other explanation when he could have done. Accordingly we found him guilty of the offence of receiving stolen property."