R v PR (2019)

A defendant had received a fair trial in a case concerning historical child sex offences where various pieces of contemporaneous evidence had been lost or destroyed. There was a substantial amount of additional material that could be used to test the reliability and credibility of the complainant, and the judge had given an impeccable direction […]

Read More

R v SR (2019)

Despite the absence of certain evidence at trial, the appellant’s convictions for sexual assault and rape of his half-sister were safe, because the totality of the trial process including the directions given and the summing up was fair.

Read More

R v PETER TONER (2019)

A judge had been entitled to refuse severance of an indictment, meaning that an offender was tried for historic and recent counts of child sexual offences at the same time. The Criminal Procedure Rules 2015 r.3.21(4)(a) had removed the technical barriers to joinder in appropriate cases: where evidence on one count would be properly admissible […]

Read More

R v MAXWELL CROSBY HALAHAN (2014)

Not guilty verdicts returned by a jury in respect of two of five counts of historic indecent assault did not demonstrate that the judge’s refusal to stay the prosecution on the ground of abuse of process due to delay and the consequent loss of evidence was mistaken, or that the verdicts were illogical or in […]

Read More

R v PAUL BARRY TAYLOR (2013)

An offender’s convictions for historic offences of rape, buggery, attempted rape, indecent assault and murder were deemed safe, as the judge had given the jury adequate directions as to the dangers of delay and its effect on the evidence.

Read More

R v AT (2013)

The court declined to re-open a Court of Appeal decision that a judge had erred in granting, pre-trial, a stay of criminal proceedings relating to historic sexual abuse charges. The defendant had not appealed against the decision but sought to challenge it on the basis that it had been overtaken by subsequent authority. The court […]

Read More

R v D (2013)

Although the delay in the appellant’s prosecution for historic sexual offences was extreme, the resulting missing evidence was not of a degree of cogency that could amount to a finding of serious prejudice in its absence. The trial judge had given the jury appropriate directions regarding the effect of the delay and the appellant’s convictions […]

Read More

R v PETER ALEXANDER B (2012)

Where a defendant facing charges of sexual offences against young boys had denied being homosexual, but the prosecution had adduced evidence tending to show his homosexual disposition, there was a real risk that the jury might have drawn an inference that that evidence alone tended to show that he also had a propensity to abuse […]

Read More

R v (1) GIASH UDDIN (2) ABDUL MALIK (3) ABDUL HOQUE (2010)

Convictions for rape, kidnap and doing acts tending and intended to pervert the course of justice were safe despite a delay of several years between the allegations and the trial. The trial judge had been right to refuse a submission of no case to answer and had clearly directed the jury on the possible prejudice […]

Read More

R v Z (2009)

Convictions for rape and indecent assault were quashed where the Crown’s reliance on hearsay evidence of bad character in the form of statements containing allegations of rape had circumvented the restrictions on hearsay evidence in the Criminal Justice Act 2003.

Read More