Regina v Ali: CACD 14 Nov 2003

The defendant appealed conviction and sentence for sexual assaults on young girls. He complained that the prosecution had been allowed to bring in evidence of previous consistent statements.
Held: The evidence of the mother had been admitted in a manner agreed between the defence and prosecutor, and the defence had not gone outside the agreement. Though there might be a residual discretion to allow re-examination to introduce evidence of previous consistent statements, that did not apply here. The evidence should not have been admitted. Nevertheless, no substantial unfairness had occurred. On sentence, the sentences were manifestly excessive, and sentences of 15 months were substituted.
Lord Justice Potter Mr Justice Cresswell Mr Justice Davis
[2003] EWCA Crim 3214, Times 21-Nov-2003
England and Wales
CitedJones v S E and Chatham Railway 1918
It is a general rule of evidence that statements may be used against a witness as admissions but that counsel is not entitled to bring evidence of statements on other occasions by the witness to confirm the testimony. . .
CitedRegina v Riley 1866
The court described the workings of the Act, saying that once the whole of the deposition is before the jury: ‘it will appear how far the suggested contradiction exists, and the absence of a particular statement may be explained by the context; or . .
CitedRegina v Beattie CACD 1989
The prosecution had been allowed to re-examine its witness to demonstrate inconsistencies.
Held: The Court doubted the legitimacy of such a course, and set out the three exceptions to the rule, namely recent complaints in sexual cases, . .
CitedRegina v Coll 1889
‘The evidence of a witness cannot be corroborated by proving statements to the same effect previously made by him; nor will the fact that his testimony is impeached in cross-examination render such evidence admissible. Even if the impeachment takes . .
CitedRegina v Larkin CCA 1943
There may be involuntary manslaughter, if the accused intentionally did an act which was unlawful and dangerous and that act inadvertently caused death. Humphreys J said: ‘Where the act which a person is engaged in performing is unlawful, then if at . .
CitedRegina v Oyesiku CACD 1971
The court considered the admissibility of evidence of consistent statements in order to rebut an allegation of recent fabrication. There may be a residual discretion with the judge to permit re-examination to show consistency when there is . .
CitedRegina v Weekes 1988
. .
CitedRegina v P (GR) CACD 1998
. .
CitedNominal Defendant v Clements 1961
(Australia) Dixon CJ said of the rules regarding the significance of previous inconsistent statements: ‘in as much as the rule forms a definite exception to the general principle excluding statements made out of court and admits a possibly . .
CitedRegina v Lennon CACD 7-Apr-1998
. .
CitedAttorney-General’s Reference No 43 of 1999 (Glyn GM) CACD 2000
In this case involving serious sexual offences by a father upon his daughter, it was stated that, upon conviction on a plea of not guilty, the appropriate sentence would have been one of between 15 and 18 months’ imprisonment. . .
CitedAttorney-General’s Reference No 72 of 1999 (MG) CACD 2000
. .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 18 March 2021; Ref: scu.187786