SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR

A trial judge had correctly ruled that the contents of a conversation revealing details about a rape victim’s previous sexual behaviour were not admissible under the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 s.41.

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 .

A conviction under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 s.9 could not be substituted for a conviction under the Sexual Offences Act 1956 s.14(1), as the indictment based on the 1956 Act could not be said to expressly or impliedly include an allegation of an offence under s.9 of the 2003 Act.

The defendant’s conviction was unsafe as the judge had wrongly refused an application for leave to cross-examine the victim, and had put to the defendant, evidence of previous sexual acts of a similar nature. The judge’s attention had wrongly been drawn to s.41(3)(c)(ii) Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 when the matter should have been considered under s.41(3)(c)(i).

Section 58 Crime and Disorder Act 1998 did not have retrospective effect; therefore licence periods could not extended under that provision for offences which occurred before 30 September 1998.