Tsekiri, R v, Court of Appeal - Criminal Division, February 17, 2017, [2017] WLR(D) 122,[2017] EWCA Crim 40

Resolution Date:February 17, 2017
Issuing Organization:Criminal Division
Actores:Tsekiri, R v
 
FREE EXCERPT

Case No: 2016/04668/C3

Neutral Citation Number: [2017] EWCA Crim 40

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)

ON APPEAL FROM

Mr Recorder Clements

Kingston upon Thames Crown Court

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand, London, WC2A 2LL

Date: 17/02/2017

Before :

THE LORD JUSTICE OF ENGLAND AND WALES

MR JUSTICE DINGEMANS

and

MR JUSTICE WILLIAM DAVIS

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Between :

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mr N Hoon (instructed by CPS Special Crime Division) for the Respondent

Mr L Edwards (instructed by LLM Solicitors) for the Applicant

Hearing date: 1 February 2017

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

JudgmentMr Justice William Davis:

  1. On 9 September 2016 in the Crown Court in Kingston upon Thames Jonathan Tsekiri was convicted of a single count of robbery. His application for leave to appeal against that conviction has been referred to the Full Court by the Registrar. We shall give leave.

    The Offence

  2. At about 10.45 p.m. on 11 June 2016 a lady named Janice Carr came out of Wimbledon Park Tube station and walked the short distance to her car which was parked on a street close to the station. She intended to drive home. She got into the driver's seat and prepared to drive away. Before she could do so a man who was outside the car opened the driver's door. The man put one hand over her mouth and the other hand at the back of her head. He held Ms Carr tight and twisted her head round. She was able to see that the man was white, of stocky build and wearing a woollen hat. Whether because she was struggling or because the man pulled her, Ms Carr ended up out of her car. She was aware of a second man who appeared to be associated with her assailant. When she screamed for help both men ran away. At some point in the struggle a gold necklace was taken from her neck. Later some segments of it were found on the road nearby.

    The scientific evidence

  3. Swabs were taken from the exterior driver's door handle of Ms Carr's car. A mixed DNA result was obtained from the swabs. The scientist who examined the result concluded that the profile consisted of components relating to a single major contributor and to at least one minor contributor. The DNA from the major contributor was consistent with the DNA profile of the appellant. The match probability was 1:1 billion. No conclusion could be reached in relation to the minor components due to their low level. The scientist could not say when the major components of the DNA had been deposited or what the source was of those components i.e. blood, saliva or some other bodily deposit. The scientist said that the deposit of the major contributor could have been due to the person touching the door handle or due to secondary transfer though she considered secondary transfer was unlikely given that the DNA in question was the major contributor to the profile.

    Arrest and interview

  4. The appellant was arrested at his home address. The postal district of that address was SW6. The robbery took place in SW19. When arresting the appellant, the police officer mistakenly identified the stolen property as a watch. The appellant's response was to say ``a watch''. When the police officer corrected himself and said that a necklace had been taken, the appellant made no further comment. When interviewed under caution, the appellant said nothing in response to all questions. He was the subject of an identification procedure. Ms Carr did not identify him.

    The trial

  5. At the conclusion of the prosecution case a submission was made to the trial judge that he should withdraw the case from the jury on the basis that no reasonable jury properly directed could convict on the available evidence. The trial judge rejected that submission. In his ruling he said that, where the finding of DNA attributable to a...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL