In a trial of charges of sexual offences against the defendant’s daughter and granddaughter, the judge had been entitled to rule that the complainants’ various complaints were mutually cross-admissible. Further, the complainants’ evidence had not been contaminated.
Where a family member had been convicted of the indecent assault of two children of the family, notwithstanding inconsistencies and conflicts in the evidence of the complainants, the judge had been entitled to leave the matter to the jury. In her directions to the jury, the judge had dealt fairly and clearly with the issue […]
A judge’s directions to a jury regarding the independence of evidence, the cross-admissibility of evidence over various counts and the danger of complaints of historic abuse were all sufficient and did not either individually or collectively render a defendant’s conviction for sexual offences unsafe.
