Evidence which was sought to be admitted under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.101(1)(d) as evidence of propensity was not inadmissible simply because the behaviour it evidenced post-dated the offences being tried.
ADMISSIBILITY BAD CHARACTER CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.101(1)(d) EVIDENCE OF PROPENSITY GUILTY PLEAS GUILTY PLEAS TO OFFENCES CONCERNING INDECENT IMAGES OF CHILDREN ADDUCED IN SUBSEQUENT TRIAL FOR INDECENT ASSAULT INDECENT ASSAULT INDECENT IMAGES OFFENCES POST-DATING ALLEGED INDECENT ASSAULT INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN PROPENSITY s.101(3) s.103(1)(a)
There was no logical inconsistency between an offender’s conviction on two counts of indecent assault upon a girl, and the jury’s acquittal in relation to the remaining 16 counts on the indictment.
CHILD SEX OFFENCES CRIMINAL PROCEDURE HISTORICAL SEXUAL OFFENCES INCONSISTENT VERDICTS INDECENT ASSAULT JURIES NO LOGICAL INCONSISTENCY IN VERDICTS WITNESS EVIDENCE
It was appropriate to quash a conviction for attempted buggery and indecent assault where new evidence that cast doubt on the veracity of the victim’s evidence, that had not been presented at the offender’s trial, threw the safety of his conviction for indecent assault and attempted buggery into doubt.
BUGGERY CONVICTIONS CREDIBILITY CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FRESH EVIDENCE FRESH EVIDENCE UNDERMINING VICTIM’S CREDIBILITY INDECENT ASSAULT SAFETY
A finding of guilt on one count could not be inconsistent with a failure to reach a verdict on another count as no verdict had been reached on that count.
CHILD SEX OFFENCES CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FAILURE TO REACH VERDICT HISTORICAL SEXUAL OFFENCES INCONSISTENT VERDICTS INDECENT ASSAULT JURIES
Given a defendant’s early guilty plea to 10 counts of indecent assault committed against his step-children, a total sentence of 13 years’ imprisonment was manifestly excessive and a total sentence of 11 years’ imprisonment was substituted.
APPROPRIATENESS OF TOTALITY OF SENTENCE CHILD SEX OFFENCES GUILTY PLEAS INDECENT ASSAULT OFFENCES COMMITTED AGAINST STEP-CHILDREN SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES ACT 1956 TOTALITY OF SENTENCE VERY EARLY GUILTY PLEA
Possible confusion caused by conflicting good and bad character directions to the jury was sufficient to make an appellant’s conviction for attempting to abduct a child unsafe.
ATTEMPTED ABDUCTION OF CHILD ATTEMPTS CHARACTER CHILD ABDUCTION CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.101(1)(d) CRIMINAL PROCEDURE EFFECT OF CONFLICTING GOOD AND BAD CHARACTER DIRECTIONS ON SAFETY OF CONVICTION EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS 1950 art.8 HUMAN RIGHTS INDECENT ASSAULT JURY DIRECTIONS RIGHT TO RESPECT FOR PRIVATE AND FAMILY LIFE s.101(3) s.112 SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES PREVENTION ORDERS
A notional determinate sentence that equated to 30 years’ imprisonment before a one-third reduction for guilty pleas, which had formed the basis for calculating the specified minimum term of a life sentence imposed for 28 counts relating to the sexual abuse of five boys, was excessive and reduced to 20 years.
28 COUNTS RELATING TO SEXUAL ABUSE OF FIVE BOYS ABUSE OF POSITION OF TRUST APPROPRIATE NOTIONAL DETERMINATE SENTENCE ATTEMPTS BUGGERY CALCULATION OF MINIMUM TERM CAUSING CHILDREN TO ENGAGE IN SEXUAL ACTIVITY CHILD SEX OFFENCES CHILDREN CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.225 FILMS INCITEMENT INDECENT ASSAULT INDECENT PHOTOGRAPHS OF CHILDREN LIFE IMPRISONMENT MEETING CHILDREN FOLLOWING SEXUAL GROOMING MINIMUM TERM PENETRATION RAPE SENTENCING SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN SEXUAL ASSAULT
An appeal against five convictions for indecent assault failed, where the defendant had been acquitted of one further count of indecent assault and where the jury had been unable to agree on two others. There was no logical inconsistency between the verdicts.
CHILD SEX OFFENCES CONVICTIONS CRIMINAL PROCEDURE INCONSISTENT VERDICTS INDECENT ASSAULT LOGICAL INCONSISTENCY BETWEEN VERDICTS SEVERAL COUNTS OF INDECENT ASSAULT SUPPLY OF DRUGS
A total extended sentence of 11 years and four months, comprising eight years and four months’ custody and a three-year extension period, imposed for four counts of indecency with a child and 10 counts of indecent assault on a female, was manifestly excessive as there was no justification for an extension period and it was undesirable to have terms of imprisonment consecutive with an extended sentence. The extension period was removed.
APPROPRIATENESS OF TWO CONSECUTIVE EXTENDED SENTENCES CHILD SEX OFFENCES CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES EXTENDED SENTENCES INDECENT ASSAULT SENTENCING
Convictions for five counts of rape and one count of indecent assault were safe, as there were no particular circumstances that required the judge to have given directions relating to the age of the victims, delay, an elaborated good character direction, or a recent complaint direction.
AGE CHILDREN CRIMINAL EVIDENCE DELAY EFFECT OF ABSENCE OF SPECIFIC DIRECTIONS ON SAFETY OF CONVICTIONS EXPERT EVIDENCE INDECENT ASSAULT JURY DIRECTIONS RAPE RAPE AND INDECENT ASSAULT RECENT COMPLAINT VYE DIRECTIONS
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.