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 sexual assault overturned due to misdirection on reasonable doubt and jury charge issues
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The Court of Appeal overturned the conviction of the appellant, who had been found guilty in the Circuit Criminal Court of multiple counts of sexual assault against a younger relative. The appeal centred on the admission of evidence regarding the appellant’s response during a family confrontation, which the prosecution treated as an admission despite expert evidence of the appellant’s vulnerability and risk of false confession due to developmental and psychological factors. The Court found that, notwithstanding the trial judge’s careful analysis of the admissibility of this evidence, the jury charge on the standard of proof was flawed. In particular, references to being ‘fairly sure’ and the use of analogies which could have undermined the principle of proof beyond reasonable doubt created a real risk of misdirection. As a result, the conviction was quashed and a retrial was ordered.
sexual assault – appeal – Circuit Criminal Court – admissibility of admission – vulnerable accused – jury directions – reasonable doubt – misdirection – expert psychological evidence – standard of proof – conviction quashed – retrial ordered – evidence in criminal trials – judicial charge to jury – Rules of the Superior Courts (RSC) – presumption of innocence
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.
