Skip to content
© Copyright, Criminal Cases Review Commission 2025.

CCRC refers the murder convictions of two men to the Court of Appeal

Published:

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) has referred to the Court of Appeal the murder convictions of two men because a review has found that a failure to hold an identification parade caused significant prejudice to the fairness of their trial.  

Rupert Ross and Leon de St Aubin were convicted on 8 November 2011 at the Central Criminal Court of the murder of Darcy Austin-Bruce outside HMP Wandsworth’s visitor centre in May 2009. They each received life sentences with a minimum term of 30 years.  

Both men appealed against their convictions in November 2011, but this was refused by the Single Judge in December 2012. Renewed applications to the Full Court were refused in May 2013.  

The CCRC received applications for review of the convictions in November 2017, accompanied by extensive submissions. After completing detailed examination of this material, the CCRC issued a decision declining to refer the cases in July 2022.  

Subsequently, further representations were received. A review has now found that there is a real possibility the Court of Appeal will quash the convictions.  

In the circumstances of this case, it was a mandatory requirement under Code D of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 for the police to hold an identification procedure. No such procedure was held.  

In view of the breach of Code D, which deprived the defendants of an important safeguard, a direction should have been given by the trial judge to explain to the jury that there had been a breach of the Code and how this may affect their consideration of evidence. No such direction was given.  

There is a real possibility the Court of Appeal will find that these irregularities caused significant prejudice to the fairness of Mr Ross and Mr de St Aubin’s trial, such that their convictions are unsafe. 

[ENDS] 

Notes to Editors: 

  1. The CCRC is an independent body set up under the Criminal Appeal Act 1995. It is responsible for independently reviewing suspected and alleged miscarriages of criminal justice in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It is based in Birmingham and is funded by the Ministry of Justice.     
  1. There are currently ten Commissioners who bring to the CCRC considerable experience from a wide variety of backgrounds. Commissioners are appointed by the monarch on the recommendation of the Prime Minister in accordance with the Office for the Commissioner for Public Appointments’ Code of Practice.  
  1. The CCRC usually receives around 1,500 applications for reviews (convictions and/or sentences) each year. Since starting work in 1997, the CCRC has referred around 3% of applications to the appeal courts.     
  1. The CCRC considers whether, as a result of new evidence or argument, there is a real possibility that the conviction would not be upheld were a reference to be made. New evidence or argument is argument or evidence which has not been raised during the trial or on appeal.  Applicants should usually have appealed first. A case can be referred in the absence of new evidence or argument or an earlier appeal only if there are “exceptional circumstances”.       
  1. If a case is referred, it is then for the appeal court to decide whether the conviction is unsafe.     
  1. More details about the role and work of the Criminal Cases Review Commission can be found at www.ccrc.gov.uk. The CCRC can be found on X, Facebook, Instagram (@the_ccrc) and Linkedin