Court of Appeal dismisses appeal against conviction for rape, on the grounds that: (a) the appellant had failed to establish that the evidence upon which he now sought to rely upon was not known and/or could not reasonably have been known at the time of the trial and, therefore, insofar as there was an alleged failure by his previous legal team, the court could only intervene if there was a serious risk of a miscarriage of justice; (b) it was not established on an objective evaluation of the complaints made by the appellant and an assessment of the evidence at trial that the manner of the defence at trial rendered the conviction unsafe; and (c) the impugned corroborative evidence had been properly regarded by the trial judge as corroboration in law.
Appeal against conviction for rape - complainant 17 years old at time of alleged offence and employee of the appellant - staff party at hotel owned by appellant - evidence as to the time spent by the complainant with the appellant in a suite - evidence of porter as to the time that the key was cut - porter not cross-examined on his evidence of the timings - contention by appellant that he asked his legal team to cross-examine the witness on this point as it went to the complainant's credibility - whether appellant's previous legal team failed to prepare or conduct the appellant's defence adequately or properly, having regard to material and instructions provided by the appellant to his legal team prior to and during the course of the trial, such that the conviction was unsafe and/or unsound - whether, in light of the alleged deficiencies at trial, the appellant ought to be allowed to adduce new or additional evidence on appeal - whether trial judge erred in charging jury that certain evidence, being the evidence of the porter, was capable of amounting to corroboration.