The appellant was charged with offences of violence against his wife. He also faced charges of anal rape of his wife. In the course of evidence the appellant, who otherwise had no previous convictions, admitted using violence towards his wife during the course of his marriage. The judge agreed to give to the jury in respect to the allegations of anal rape the propensity limb of the good character direction. There were good reasons for not giving the credibility limb of the direction since the appellant had also admitted describing himself in interview as ‘non-violent’ and he admitted acts of dishonesty relating to his financial affairs. In the result, however, the judge neglected to give any direction to the jury in respect of his ‘good’ character. Held Moses LJ recognised that: ‘Even where he has been shown to be guilty of criminal conduct and thus cannot pray in aid absolutely good character, the prima facie rule of practice is to qualify the Vye direction rather than withhold it.’ He recognisedthat the circumstantial case against the appellant was strong and that there was good evidence that, if the offences of anal rape were committed by the appellant, they were conceived by him as a form of physical punishment of his wife. Nevertheless: ‘it is true that the fact he was writing of rape as a punishment, and that his wife alleged that the rape was punishment for her confession to adultery, undermined any reliance that the defendant might place upon his absence of conviction for previous sexual offences. But the fact that the effect of a good character direction might be undermined by the facts of a particular case provides no warrant for declining to give any such direction. There will be many cases where a defendant is entitled to a good character direction but the weight to be given it is diminished by the fact or circumstances of the particular case. There is no principle that a judge is justified in declining to give a good character direction merely because he foresees that the prosecution may be able to diminish its fact. It was for the jury, not the judge, to decide what weight to give the absence of previous convictions.’
Judges:
Moses LJ, Burnett J, Scott-Gall HHJ
Citations:
[2012] EWCA Crim 19, (2012) 176 JP 188, [2012] 1 Cr App R 33, 176 JP 188, [2012] WLR(D) 10
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – GAI v Regina CACD 5-Oct-2012
The defendant’s appeal based on the absence of a good character direction had succeeded. The court now gave its reasons.
Held: After reviewing the authorities, the appeal succeeded: ‘the learned judge was wrong to find that the fact that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Crime
Updated: 04 October 2022; Ref: scu.450555
