Bad character evidence in respect of complainants in sexual assault allegations had been properly excluded where a judge had decided that it lacked substantial probative value as it did not establish a propensity towards general untruthfulness. That exclusion avoided the inevitable, grossly prejudicial, admission of the accused’s previous convictions for sexual offences.
An acquittal on counts of rape and assault by penetration would be quashed and a retrial ordered where the complainant had left the country after giving an achieving best evidence interview and the Crown had offered no evidence at trial. There was new and compelling evidence in the form of the complainant’s evidence which was […]
In a trial in which the defendant was charged with sexual offences, the judge had been wrong to admit “bad character” evidence suggesting that the defendant was a voyeur.
A judge had been correct to admit a defendant’s previous bad character under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.101(1)(g) since the conduct of that defendant in his evidence-in-chief amounted to an attack on prosecution witnesses. However, a sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment had been manifestly excessive for breach of a sexual offences prevention order.
The judge had been wrong to admit documents, prepared by police officers, giving details of methods used in the commission of offences of which the appellant had been previously convicted, but the appellant’s convictions for the instant offences were nevertheless safe. It was important that the formal procedures referred to in R. v Hanson (Nicky) […]
