§ 30. Mr. PRITTasked the Home Secretary whether he is aware that in the case of Rex v. Bryant evidence was given by a Home Office expert to the effect that the presence of 149 parts in 1,000,000 of arsenic in coal ash was inexplicable except upon the hypothesis that arsenic had been burned in the fire in question; that the learned judge directed the jury that that evidence constituted corroboration of the principal witness for the prosecution, who alone deposed to arsenic being to the knowledge of the prisoner present in the house; that the said expert evidence was admittedly incorrect and mistaken and that the Court of Criminal Appeal apparently felt itself bound by precedent to refuse to investigate whether the said evidence was mistaken; and whether he will consider the introduction of amending legislation to secure that verdicts founded on mistaken evidence shall be subject to inquiry on appeal?
§ Sir J. SIMONIn the course of investigating this matter, I ascertained from the Lord Chief Justice that he and the other Judges sitting in the Court of Criminal Appeal, for the purpose of deciding the appeal, proceeded on the assumption that this item of evidence was mistaken. There was ample evidence of corroboration quite apart from this challenged detail. Neither the trial Judge (whom I also personally inter- 2222 viewed) nor the Court of Criminal Appeal were able to regard the matter referred to as affecting the conclusion reached, and after the most careful examination of all the circumstances, I reached the same view. As regards the last part of the question, no such legislation is required as, of course, an allegation of mistaken evidence can be considered on appeal and, as I have said, it was in fact considered and fully allowed for in the present case.