Skip to content
© Copyright, Criminal Cases Review Commission 2026.

Murder conviction referred to the Court of Appeal over discrepancies in witness testimony

Published:

A man’s murder conviction has been referred to the Court of Appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) as there are significant discrepancies between evidence given at trial and at a later retrial.  

Jerome Bailey was convicted of the murder of his cousin Tefsa Campbell at Croydon Crown Court on 20 January 2020 and was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 18 years. He was 40 years old at the time. 

Mr Campbell, who was also 40, died as a result of a stab wound received during an altercation between him and Mr Bailey on 3 July 2019 near the junction of Burns Road and Latchmere Road in London. 

The jury at trial reached a unanimous verdict on the count of murder. 

In February 2020 Mr Bailey sought leave to appeal with fresh evidence about a knife that had been shown to the jury at trial. He argued that the jury had been misled and that this damaged his credibility. Mr. Bailey’s application for leave was rejected by the Court of Appeal in November 2021.  

In 2022, Mr Bailey was re-tried on one count of having a bladed article in public. The jury had failed to reach a verdict on that count at the original trial. 

Mr Bailey applied to the CCRC in April 2024, raising the witness testimony from the re-trial. He argued that there was a significant difference between the account of the events given by a witness during the first trial, and the testimony they gave at the re-trial. He also argued that the refusal by the Court of Appeal in 2021 was wrong.  

After reviewing the case, the CCRC has determined there are discrepancies between the evidence of one of the key witnesses at the original trial and the re-trial. The CCRC is satisfied that, considering the significance of the evidence in the prosecution case, if the jury had heard the evidence from the re-trial, there is a real possibility that they may reasonably have reached a different conclusion.  

[ENDS]

Notes to Editor:  

  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 16 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 received more than 1,800 applications for reviews (convictions and/or sentences) last year. Since starting work in 1997, the CCRC has referred more than 900 cases 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.