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.
Rape conviction successfully appealed due to material misdirection concerning corroboration
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Court of Appeal allows appeal against conviction for rape offences and invites submissions from the parties as to whether or not a retrial should be ordered, upholding one ground of appeal only, being that there was a material misdirection concerning what evidence was capable of supporting or corroborating the complainant’s evidence, and dismissing all other grounds of appeal, finding that: (a) the trial judge dealt appropriately with the issue of adverse pre-trial publicity; (b) the interviews with the appellant were all correctly admitted into evidence; and (c) there was no error made in refusing to withdraw the case from the jury.
Appeal against conviction for rape offences - appellant in relationship with complainant - had one child together and complainant was pregnant at time of some of the alleged offences - video footage from appellant's phone obtained showing anal penetration of the complainant on earlier occasions while she was unconscious or asleep - appellant alleged that complainant had consented and denied drugging her - previous trial at which appellant was convicted of sexual assault but no verdict reached on the rape counts - retrial of the rape counts, six weeks after sentencing hearing for sexual assault - whether trial judge erred in refusing to postpone appellant's trial due to adverse publicity - whether trial judge erred in determinations, rulings and directions in respect of corroboration - whether trial judge erred in his ruling concerning the admissibility of the appellant’s interviews - whether trial judge erred in his rulings, determinations and directions in respect of complaint evidence - whether trial judge erred in refusing to withdraw the charges from the jury - whether trial judge erred in respect of the requisitions raised - whether cumulative effect of the alleged errors made by the trial judge rendered the verdict unfair in all the circumstances.
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.
