AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
2 paragraphs · 152 wordsViscount Dunedin
Their Lordships have frequently stated that they do not sit as a Court of criminal appeal. For them to interfere with a criminal sentence there must be something so irregular or so outrageous as to shock the very basis of justice. Such an instance was found in Dillet''s case 1887 12 AC 459=56 LT 615=36 WR 81=16 Cox CC 241, which has always been held to be the leading authority on such matters. In the present case the only real point is as to the meaning and effect of a section of the Evidence Act. The petitioners contended that a wrong view had been taken of the matter, also that upon a proper reading of the section there was an insufficiency of evidence to warrant the conviction. Those are merely points for a Court of criminal appeal. Their Lordships will humbly advise His Majesty that the petition should be dismissed.