Court of Appeal dismisses appeal against conviction for rape and sexual assault, on the grounds that: (a) the trial judge could not be criticised for not acceding to a request for a corroboration warning, given the wide discretion vested in him in that regard; and (b) although it had not been helpful for the trial judge to charge the jury on the issue of consent, anyone hearing the charge and recharge could have been left in no doubt that the jury was being asked to consider a case where the complainant was saying that sexual activity had taken place against her will but the case for the defence was that no such activity had ever occurred.
Appeal against conviction for rape and four counts of sexual assault - appellant owned farm and stable yard where he stabled horses and offered livery service - complainant's family also involved with horses in the local area and the two families knew each other - complainant's horse kept at appellant's property - appellant would sometimes collect complainant from school by arrangement with her mother - complainant aged 16 at time of first offence - appellant denied the incidents in their entirety - no defence raised that complainant had consented to sexual activity - no sample counts on indictment - each count relating to specific incident and specific allegations - two counts where nolle prosequi entered following disagreement among jury - 'partial' rather than full corroboration warning given by trial judge - whether trial judge erred in failing to give the jury a corroboration warning when requested to so by counsel - whether trial judge erred in misdirecting the jury on the issue of consent - whether trial was unfair, unsafe and unsatisfactory.