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.
ADMISSIBILITY ATTACKS ON CHARACTER BAD CHARACTER CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.100 CRIMINAL LAW PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS Pt 1 s.100(1)(b) s.101 s.101(1)(d) s.101(1)(g) s.3 SEX OFFENDERS SEXUAL ASSAULT WHETHER JUDGE PROPERLY EXCLUDED COMPLAINANTS’ BAD CHARACTER EVIDENCE
Where a 12-year-old complainant had alleged sexual abuse by her uncle, the trial judge had been entitled to refuse to allow her to be cross-examined about her previous sexual experience. What, if any, sexual experienceshe might have had was not an appropriate area of investigation and was not of substantial probative value in relation to whether she might have been lying about the conduct of her uncle .
ADMISSIBILITY BAD CHARACTER CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.100 CROSS-EXAMINATION SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR YOUTH JUSTICE AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1999 s.41
A judge had been correct in not permitting a defendant to cross-examine a complainant concerning a telephone recording where the complainant had allegedly confessed to murder, as it was not relevant to the issues in the case, namely whether the complainant had consented to intercourse, and fabricated evidence.
BAD CHARACTER CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.100 CROSS-EXAMINATION INTIMIDATION OF WITNESSES PROPENSITY RAPE RELEVANCE
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.