Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Conviction for rape upheld despite minor issues with trial judge’s approach
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Court of Appeal dismisses appeal against conviction for rape, on the grounds that: (a) indifference as to whether the complainant was consenting or not had not been an issue in the case at any stage, having regard to the evidence, and that while the trial judge's explanation might, in another case, have had the potential to confuse or mislead the jury, there was no appreciable risk in this case; and (b) while the corroboration warning given to the jury by the trial judge could have been more detailed, it did draw to the jury’s attention that they needed to take particular care before convicting on the basis of the uncorroborated evidence of the complainant, and was therefore adequate in the circumstances of the case.
Appeal against conviction and sentence - tried on two counts of rape - acquitted on one count and convicted on the other (10-2) - whether trial judge failed to explain recklessness properly to the jury such that they had the impression that it was objective rather than subjective test - whether trial judge erred in giving the corroboration warning.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
