Judge’s remarks during defilement trial were directed at putting young complainant at ease

Criminal law – appeal of conviction for defilement of a child – section 2(1) of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act, 2006 – refusal of the Appellant’s application for a Directed Verdict – Comments by the trial judge – comments by the trial judge prior to the evidence of the complainant – whether it was inappropriate for the trial judge to seek to apologise in advance of cross-examination for the questions which were to be asked on behalf of the appellant – whether there was sufficient evidence of penetration of the complainant’s anus by the accused – there was enough cogency and clarity in what the complainant had said in his evidence in chief to justify the case being allowed to go the jury – complainant’s expressions of a lack of certitude and the absence of evidence of pain or distress – while there were infirmities in the complainant’s evidence, these were all well within the scope of the jury to resolve – overall structure and content of the charge that the trial judge was striving to be balanced and fair, and was not favouring either side, consciously or unconsciously – appeal dismissed.