Nicholas Curtis, convicted of murdering Glenda Jackson alongside his brother Stuart, may have his conviction overturned after the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) referred the case to the Court of Appeal. The referral follows a review that identified a significant issue with the partial defence of loss of control, which was not raised at trial or in his appeal.
Background of the Case
Nicholas and Stuart Curtis were convicted in April 2019 of the murder of Glenda Jackson, who was attacked outside her home on Grayson Mews, Birkenhead, in September 2018. On the night of her death, Ms Jackson had reported to police that she was assaulted and subjected to homophobic abuse by a group associated with the Curtis brothers.
Liverpool Crown Court heard that Ms Jackson later called police, reporting she had been punched and kicked, but was also heard telling the 999 call handler she was "going to stab them". Officers found Ms Jackson with injuries to her face, but she was reluctant to give a statement. Some time later, she armed herself with a knife and hammer and began damaging a Mercedes van belonging to Nicholas Curtis, leading the brothers to attack her.
Trial and Conviction
The Crown Prosecution Service's case was that Nicholas Curtis stabbed Ms Jackson five times while Stuart Curtis kicked and stamped on her head. Nicholas Curtis argued at trial that he had acted in self-defence when confronted by an angry aggressor armed with a knife who had intentionally damaged his van. His case was that Ms Jackson had lunged at him, stabbing him twice, and that she sustained fatal injuries in the ensuing struggle.
The prosecution argued that, even if Ms Jackson had used unlawful force, the medical evidence showed the response was a deliberate attack which went beyond reasonable self-defence. It was argued Ms Jackson was the victim of a joint attack by Nicholas and Stuart Curtis, motivated by retaliation. Both men were convicted of murder following a trial.
Sentencing and Appeal
Nicholas Curtis was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 18 years, while his brother was sentenced to a minimum of 16 years. Sentencing judge David Aubrey KC told the pair: "I am satisfied both of you initiated violence on that night and as the chain of events unfolded. Only the two of you know what happened in that communal hallway."
The judge told Nicholas Curtis "you intended to kill Glenda Jackson" and, considering the self-defence line, added "any acts of defence almost instantaneously became acts of aggression from both of you". Nicholas Curtis's attempts to appeal his conviction were unsuccessful, and he applied in June 2024 to the CCRC.
CCRC Referral
Following a review, the CCRC confirmed on Tuesday, October 20, that it has decided to refer Mr Curtis's conviction to the Court of Appeal. CCRC Chair Dame Vera Baird KC said: "The law requires all relevant defences to be properly considered when a person's guilt is being decided. Our review identified a significant issue around the partial defence of loss of control which was not raised at Mr Curtis's trial or in his appeal.
"We consider there is a real possibility that the defence should have been put before the jury and, as a result, that the Court of Appeal may find the murder conviction unsafe. We have referred the case so that the Court of Appeal can consider the issue and decide whether the conviction can safely stand."
The CCRC said it believed there to be a "real possibility" that the appeal court would find the conviction unsafe because "it is not clear that the trial judge properly considered the partial defence of loss of control". A CCRC spokesperson added: "The CCRC also considers there is a real possibility that, had the issue been fully considered at the trial, loss of control would have been put to the jury. The CCRC considers there was sufficient evidence for the jury to decide whether the legal requirements for the defence were met."
Loss of control was not raised by either the prosecution or the defence at trial and did not feature in Mr Curtis's grounds of appeal. Had the defence been put to the jury as an alternative to self-defence, and had the jury accepted it, Mr Curtis would have been acquitted of murder and convicted of manslaughter instead.
