Home / News & Events

John Burton QC secures acquittal in bludgeoning attack

JU was charged with inflicting GBH with intent on his fiancé and with the alternative offence of wounding. The Prosecution alleged that JU repeatedly stuck his fiancé to the back of her head in her bedroom with a weapon, which he later disposed of. The Prosecution relied upon a number of pieces of evidence in the case. The main evidence relied upon was;

1. the evidence of the complainant who claimed to remember being hit on the back of the head,
2. alleged bad character evidence that the Complainant had called the police seven times previously to the address to make complaints of assault against the Defendant,
3. forensic evidence that the Prosecution claimed supported the contention that there was an attack in the bedroom and that because of blood splattering on his clothes, the Defendant was present when blows were struck to her head,
4. the fact that he had tried to clean up the blood before the police and paramedics arrived,
5. his aggression towards the paramedics which caused them to leave the address without treating the complainant and await the police,
6. alleged inconsistencies in his account in interview,
7. that when remanded on bail he had confessed to the assault in a bail hostel to a night time supervisor.

The Defendants case was the same throughout, he had never struck his fiancé and the previous incidents were as a result of them both getting drunk and her calling the police. No previous allegations were proceeded with. On the night of the incident both he and his fiancé had been drinking heavily and he awoke to find her covered in blood as a result of an injury that must have been caused by her falling whilst drunk.

The Prosecution instructed five expert witnesses in this case and the defence instructed four. The court considered the matter so serious that a certificate for Queens Counsel and Junior was granted and John Burton QC conducted JU's defence.

Before the trial the Learned Judge ruled after a submission by John that the bad character evidence should not be admitted before the jury. After John's cross-examination of the complainant, the expert witnesses and the Night-time Supervisor, the Learned Judge ruled in favour of John's submission that there was no case to answer. JU was acquitted of both charges and an order for defence costs was made.

24 October 2011

Top of page