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.
Appeal of conviction for sexual assault refused where verdict was safe and trial was fair
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Court of Criminal Appeal dismisses appeal of conviction on five counts of sexual assault on the appellant's niece, on the grounds, inter alia, that: the trial judge was entirely correct to refuse an application to halt the trial on grounds of delay or the unavailability of certain evidence; the judge correctly applied established legal principles in relation to recent complaints evidence; and the judge was entitled to take the view that the evidence of the complainant’s father was evidence that was capable of amounting to corroboration.
Appeal of convinction - appellant convicted of five counts of sexual assault on his niece - sentenced to a term of seven years and two months imprisonment, with the final year and eight months of the sentence suspended on conditions - whether trial judge erred in refusing to stop the trial by reason of delay and the unavailability of certain evidence - issue in relation to the admissibility of recent complaint evidence - whether a particular telephone call between the father of the complainant and the appellant was capable of amounting to corroboration - criticism of the trial judge’s charge in relation to the defence case - court not caused to doubt the safety of the verdict or the fairness of the trial - appeal dismissed.
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.
