A court clarified that R. v Devichand [1991] Crim. L.R. 446 was not an example of a situation where a jury was introduced to extraneous material after it had retired as the editors of Archbold implied, but that it was a case that had turned on its own peculiar facts

CA (Crim Div) (Leveson LJ, Mittings J, Males J)

19/03/2013