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.
Call now: +44 (0) 141 2800504
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
Appeals against convictions for numerous and various sexual offences were dismissed where the judge had correctly admitted evidence of the making of complaints under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.120(2) and evidence as to bad character, and had not misled the jury in his directions.
ADMISSIBILITY ADMISSION OF EVIDENCE UNDER S.120(2) CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 BAD CHARACTER CONSENT CRIMINAL EVIDENCE CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT 2003 s.120(2) DIRECTIONS JURY DIRECTIONS PROPENSITY RAPE RECENT COMPLAINT s.101(1)(a) s.103(1)(a) s.112 s.114 s.114(1)(d) s.116(2)(b) s.120 s.120(7) s.120(7)(d) SENTENCE LENGTH SENTENCING SEXUAL OFFENCES SUMMING UP