Talk:No case to answer

	This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Law Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I can't find a report of "MacKenzie (1992) 96 Cr App R 98", but it is mentioned (as R v MacKenzie with the same citation) in R v N Ltd and another [2008] EWCA Crim 1223. It's unclear how "no case to answer" applies here. That other case says that "(a) the unreliability of the confessions emerged in part from the evidence given as part of the defendant's case by himself and by the doctors called for him, and (b) there had been a submission of no case at the close of the Crown case which had been rejected but there was no ground of appeal suggesting that that was wrong". This seems to mean that a submission of no case to answer could not be allowed because the defence had not yet demonstrated the unreliability of the confessions (indeed, the jury apparently found them reliable enough to convict, though the conviction was quashed on appeal). Hairy Dude (talk) 13:37, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]