Regina v Ananthanarayanan: CACD 11 Mar 1993

The defendant appealed against his conviction for indecent assault. He complained that the judge had in effect left to the jury the question of whether the evidence of the two accusers was contaminated.
Held: His appeal succeeded. It was for the judge in a case, and not the jury to assess the risk that potentially corroborative evidence might be contaminated. If he decided that it might have that quality, he had a duty, not a discretion, to exclude it.

Judges:

Laws LJ

Citations:

Times 16-Mar-1993, Gazette 26-May-1993, [1994] 9 CLY 97

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Not FollowedRegina v H (Evidence: Corroboration); Regina v Hepburn CACD 2-Mar-1994
The defendant appealed his conviction for indecent assault on his daughter and stepdaughter. The prosecution relied upon the allegatins as similar fact evidence. The complainants denied collaboration and concoction.
Held: The jury should . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Evidence

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.86048