The defendant appealed convictions for indecent assault, saying that convictions on some counts and acquittals on others were so inconsistent as to call the convictions into question, showing acceptance of the complainant’s evidence on some counts and rejection on others.
Held: The summing-up as a whole, was succinct, fair, accurate and balanced. The appeal was rejected. He had failed to show any logical inconsistency between the verdicts.
Judges:
Lord Justice Evans, Mr Justice Hidden, And The Recorder Of Leeds His Honour Judge Brian Walsh Qc
Citations:
[1997] EWCA Crim 480
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Regina v Durante CACD 1972
Logical inconsistency is generally an essential prerequisite for success of an appeal against conviction on the ground of inconsistency of verdicts. . .
Cited – Regina v Cilgram CACD 1994
There were seven charges. Counts 1 to 5, on which the appellant was convicted, were of sexual offences which took place when the victim was aged between 5 and 12 years. Count 5 was a charge of rape. There were two counts, 6 and 7 in the indictment, . .
Cited – Regina v Makanjuola CACD 17-May-1995
Guidance was given on the directions to be given to the jury where a co-accused speaks for prosecution as a witness and in sexual assault cases. The full corroboration warning is not now needed; the Judge may use his own discretion, and may give a . .
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v B CACD 15-May-1997
The Court upheld a conviction in respect of an Appellant who had been convicted of three offences on a six-count indictment. He was acquitted of the other three. In respect of each of the six counts the Prosecution relied upon the uncorroborated . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 08 October 2022; Ref: scu.149935