[2011] HCJAC 13

An accused's submission of no case to answer in respect of a money laundering charge ought to have been upheld where there was no basis for imputing to him knowledge that monies paid into his company were the proceeds of crime, and where the jury had been incorrectly directed that there was sufficient evidence of knowledge on the accused's part to convict him of that charge, their approach to a second charge of money laundering had to have inevitably have been coloured by that approach and accordingly, a miscarriage of justice had arisen.

HCJ (The Lord Justice General (Hamilton), Lord Osborne, Lord Eassie)


0 comments… add one

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Skip to toolbar