An appellant’s conviction for rape was safe where there was substantial evidence before the jury that the victim was intoxicated and incapable of consenting to sexual intercourse with him. There was no presumption that the conviction was unsafe because the judge did not give a good character direction.
CAUTIONS CONSENT CREDIBILITY CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE GOOD CHARACTER JURY DIRECTIONS RAPE
Although part of prosecuting counsel’s cross-examination of a rape defendant, related to bad character and based on inadmissible hearsay evidence, had been misjudged and regrettable, it had not affected the overall fairness of the proceedings or the safety of the verdict.
ADMISSIBILITY BAD CHARACTER CAUTIONS CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CROSS-EXAMINATION DETENTION FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION EFFECT ON OVERALL FAIRNESS OF PROCEEDINGS AND SAFETY OF CONVICTION HEARSAY EVIDENCE INTRODUCTION OF INADMISSIBLE HEARSAY EVIDENCE DURING CROSS-EXAMINATION OF RAPE DEFENDANT RAPE SENTENCING SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN YOUNG OFFENDERS
Please use the form below to make contact. Your email will be responded to promptly (we endeavour to respond to all email enquiries within one hour). Alternatively, you can call Stephen's firm, Twelve Tabulae Limited, on +44 (0) 203 846 5801.