Top Rape Barrister and Leading Criminal KC
Call now: +44 (0) 203 846 5801
≡
  • Home
  • Expertise
    • Rape Defence Barrister
    • Sexual Assault
      • Assault By Penetration Defence Barrister
      • Assault By Touching Defence Barrister
      • Administering Substances Defence Barrister
    • Underage sex
      • Grooming
    • Exploitation
    • Porn / Voyeurism
  • Criminal Appeals
  • Bail
  • Direct Access
  • Contact
  •  Call +44 (0) 203 846 5801
Top Criminal Barrister QC and Leading Rape Defence Counsel

EXCLUSION

June 27, 2019

There was no general principle that delay, in a criminal trial involving young children, meant that the evidence of that child should always be excluded at a subsequent trial; each case was fact specific. In the instant case, a judge had been entitled to admit a child’s Achieving Best Evidence interview at trial despite the delay of two years and four months since the interview had taken place.

BEST EVIDENCE CHILDREN CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CROSS-EXAMINATION DELAY EXCLUSION RAPE OF CHILD UNDER 13 SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13

June 13, 2007

Where a case concerning allegations of rape and of aiding and abetting rape turned entirely on the credibility of the complainant as against the appellants, and evidence which went to that issue had been excluded, even though that had been done with the agreement of defence counsel, the convictions were quashed.

CREDIBILITY CRIMINAL EVIDENCE DEFENCE AGREEING TO EXCLUSION OF EVIDENCE DEFENCE WITNESSES EXCLUSION EXCLUSION OF EVIDENCE PERTINENT TO CREDIBILITY RAPE WITNESS STATEMENTS

January 29, 2003

A judge had exercised his discretion fairly under s.41 Youth and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 by ruling as admissible certain evidence about sexual abuse on complainant children by persons other than their parents against whom criminal proceedings had been brought.

ABUSE ADMISSIBILITY APPEALS CHILDREN COMPLAINTS CONVICTIONS CREDIT CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL LAW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CROSS-EXAMINATION DISCRETION EXCLUSION EXERCISE GUILT INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS INDECENCY WITH A CHILD INDECENT ASSAULT INNOCENCE INTERVIEW JURY LEAVE MISCONDUCT OTHERS PACE 1984 PARENTS PERMISSION PROCEDURAL IMPROPRIETY PROOF QUESTIONING RELEVANCE RIGHT TO QUESTION CHILD WITNESSES IN RELATION TO PRIOR COMPLAINTS OF ABUSE S.41 YOUTH AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1999 s.42(1)(c) S.78 POLICE AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1984 SEXUAL OFFENCES UNSAFE VIDEOS YOUTH JUSTICE AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1999 s.41

Contact Stephen

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.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

 

"HISTORIC" OFFENCES ABUSE OF POSITION OF TRUST ADMISSIBILITY AGGRAVATING FEATURES ASSAULT BY PENETRATION ATTEMPTS BAD CHARACTER BUGGERY CAUSING CHILDREN TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY CHILDREN CHILD SEX OFFENCES CONSENT CREDIBILITY CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL LAW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CROSS-EXAMINATION DANGEROUSNESS DELAY EXTENDED SENTENCES FRESH EVIDENCE GUILTY PLEAS HUMAN RIGHTS IMPRISONMENT FOR PUBLIC PROTECTION INCONSISTENT VERDICTS INDECENT ASSAULT INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN JURY DIRECTIONS MINIMUM TERM PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS RAPE RAPE OF CHILD UNDER 13 RIGHT TO RESPECT FOR PRIVATE AND FAMILY LIFE SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SENTENCING GUIDELINES SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN SEXUAL ASSAULT SEXUAL ASSAULT OF CHILD UNDER 13 SEXUAL OFFENCES SEXUAL OFFENCES PREVENTION ORDERS SUMMING UP TOTALITY OF SENTENCE UNDUE LENIENCY YOUNG OFFENDERS