Possibility of ‘irregularities in the taking of jury verdicts’ leads to CCRC referral to the Court of Appeal  

Convictions where there were irregularities in the way jury verdicts were returned have been referred to the Court of Appeal by the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC).  

Jonathan Snape was convicted of offences including the murder of Nathan Marshall and attempted murder of Aaron Baker in December 2018 at Manchester Minshull Street Crown Court. Prior to trial, he pleaded guilty to four counts including the manslaughter of Mr Marshall (an alternative to murder) and unlawful wounding of Mr Baker (an alternative to attempted murder). He was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 24 years. 

The issue for the jury was mainly around intent and transferred malice, as the prosecution case was that Mr Snape had intended to kill Mr Baker, with whom he had had a fight earlier. He had subsequently driven a car towards Mr Baker’s group but ended up hitting his friend, Mr Marshall, who later died from his injuries. 

Questions have since been raised around the taking of jury verdicts on the count of murder of Mr Marshall, attempted murder of Mr Baker, and wounding Mr Baker with intent.  

Unanimous guilty verdicts were taken on 17 December 2018 to count one (murder of Mr Marshall) and count three (wounding Mr Baker with intent). The jury were then discharged but concerns were raised by the defence at the time about the validity of the verdicts and whether they were in fact unanimous.  

It was agreed that the judge would bring back the jury the following day to repeat the procedure of taking the verdicts. However, when the jury returned the following day, they went into a further period of retirement and a majority direction was given. Following this, new verdicts were taken and the jury found Mr Snape guilty by a majority on count one (murder of Mr Marshall) and count two (attempted murder of Mr Baker).  

Mr Snape applied for leave to appeal against his convictions and sentence to the Court of Appeal. Leave to appeal conviction was refused in April 2019 and Mr Snape renewed his application to the Full Court. 

The Full Court refused the application in December 2019, stating the convictions could not be considered unsafe. It dismissed the appeal against sentence stating that the sentence ‘comes nowhere near being manifestly excessive’.  

Mr Snape’s representative applied to the CCRC in April 2023, raising concerns about the way in which the verdicts were taken. Following investigation of the way in which the verdicts were taken, the CCRC has determined that this point provides a real possibility the Court of Appeal will find Mr Snape’s convictions unsafe.  

[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.     

2. There are currently nine 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.   

3. 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.     

4. 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”.       

5. If a case is referred, it is then for the appeal court to decide whether the conviction is unsafe.     

6. 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.