Catherine McIntosh on behalf of James McInnes v. Her Majestys Advocate

There are three grounds of appeal. The first is that evidence of an incriminating statement made by the deceased to two police officers was unfairly obtained and ought not to have been admitted by the trial judge. The second is an Anderson ground in which various criticisms are made of the solicitor advocate who defended the deceased. The third is that although the trial judge directed the jury on the question of onus of proof under section 28 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (the 1971 Act) according to the law as it was understood at the time a subsequent decision of the court (Henvey and Reid v HM Adv 2005 SCCR 282) has established that that was a misdirection.The third ground is presented in conjunction with a devolution minute in which it is asserted that the trial judges directions on onus were incompatible with the deceaseds right under article 6(2) of the Convention which relates to the presumption of innocence and accordingly that if he were to support the conviction the Lord Advocate would be acting in a way that was incompatible with the deceaseds Convention rights.