An offender’s conviction for offences of sexual acitivity with a child was not rendered unsafe by the judge’s failure, after allowing a video recording of the complainant’s evidence-in-chief to be replayed to the jury when they had retired to consider their verdict, to expressly warn the jury against giving the replay video evidence a disproportionate weight.
CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE EVIDENCE IN CHIEF JURIES SEXUAL ACTIVITY WITH CHILDREN VICTIM SURCHARGE VIDEO RECORDINGS
Guilty verdicts on two sample counts of rape relating to a six-year period were logically inconsistent with acquittals on four specific counts of rape against the same victim. A reasonable jury could not, on the paucity of the stand-alone evidence concerning the sample counts, be sure of guilt in relation to them if they rejected the specific events.
CONSENT COUNTS CRIMINAL LAW CRIMINAL PROCEDURE INCONSISTENT VERDICTS JURIES PREVIOUS INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS RAPE
In a trial concerning conspiracy to rape a child under 13, the judge, when considering a submission of no case to answer, had failed to consider whether a reasonable jury could be entitled to infer that the offenders intended to carry out the agreement. Taking the prosecution evidence at its highest, no reasonable jury could infer that the offenders had intended to carry out the agreement.
CONSPIRACY CRIMINAL PROCEDURE INTENTION OF OFFENDERS TO CARRY OUT AGREEMENT JURIES NO CASE TO ANSWER RAPE OF CHILD UNDER 13 WHETHER REASONABLE JURY COULD INFER AN AGREEMENT TO RAPE A CHILD UNDER 13
Where a defendant facing charges of sexual offences against young boys had denied being homosexual, but the prosecution had adduced evidence tending to show his homosexual disposition, there was a real risk that the jury might have drawn an inference that that evidence alone tended to show that he also had a propensity to abuse young boys. It was at least arguable that the judge should have warned the jury in strong terms not to draw such an inference.
ADMISSIBILITY CHILD SEX OFFENCES CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE EVIDENCE OF HOMOSEXUAL DISPOSITION HOMOSEXUALITY INFERENCES JURIES JURY DIRECTIONS PERMISSION TO APPEAL PREJUDICE RISK OF JURY DRAWING DISCRIMINATORY INFERENCE REGARDING PROPENSITY TO ABUSE YOUNG BOYS SEXUAL OFFENCES
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
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
Where a trial proceeded on the basis that different counts of criminal liability required separate consideration and there was a difference in the cogency of detail in the evidence on the different counts, a decision of the jury was not unlawful due to inconsistency where an offender was found guilty on a count of indecency with a child but acquitted on counts of rape.
CHILD SEX OFFENCES CONSISTENCY OF JURY VERDICTS CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE INCONSISTENT VERDICTS JURIES MULTIPLE COUNTS OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY SENTENCING STRENGTH OF EVIDENCE SUMMING UP SUSPENDED SENTENCES WITNESSES
Evidence prejudicial to the defence and of no probative value that had inadvertently been disclosed at the appellant’s trial had resulted in unfairness to the appellant and it was doubtful, given the importance of his good character to his defence, that any directions could have overcome that unfairness.
BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS CREDIBILITY CRIMINAL EVIDENCE DISCHARGE DISCHARGE OF JURY GOOD CHARACTER INADVERTENT DISCLOSURE JURIES JURY DIRECTIONS MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE POLICE WITNESS REVEALED PREVIOUS CHARGE ON SIMILAR OFFENCE PREJUDICIAL EFFECT PROBATIVE VALUE PROPENSITY SEXUAL OFFENCES SUMMING UP UNFAIRNESS TO ACCUSED UNLAWFUL SEXUAL INTERCOURSE
Where a defendant faced several counts of sexual offences on the same victim, the jury’s verdicts could not be said to be inconsistent where it had convicted the defendant on the only count that had supporting evidence.
ACQUITTAL ON MAJORITY OF COUNTS CARER CEREBRAL PALSY CONVICTION SAFE CREDIBILITY CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL LAW INCONSISTENCY WITH CONVICTION ON SINGLE COUNT INCONSISTENT VERDICTS INDECENT ASSAULT JURIES JURY TRIAL MALE VICTIM SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE WITNESSES
A conviction for indecent assault was quashed on grounds of apparent bias on the part of one or more of the jurors. The judge had no firm basis for holding the accused responsible for incidents that led to the bias.
APPARENT BIAS BIAS CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CROSS-EXAMINATION DISCHARGING JURY IMPARTIAL TRIBUNAL INDECENT ASSAULT JURIES
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.