CA v The Queen

The appeal was brought by the Crown against the defendant, who had been convicted of one count of carnal knowledge of his five-year-old daughter and three counts of indecent dealing. The appeal centred on the admissibility of certain medical evidence and the appropriateness of the sentence imposed. The case was heard in the Court of Appeal, which reviewed the trial proceedings and the arguments presented by both parties.

The legal issues in the appeal included whether the medical witness had given evidence that was radically different from her deposition, and whether the published medical research she cited was admissible. The Crown also argued that the trial judge had not properly addressed certain factual complaints that had been brought to his attention. The defendant contended that the evidence was properly admitted and that the verdict was safe and satisfactory, and that the sentence was excessive.

The Court of Appeal found that the medical evidence was admissible, and that the trial judge had properly considered the factual complaints and directed the jury accordingly. The court held that the verdict was not unsafe or unsatisfactory, and that the effective sentence of nine years' imprisonment was not inappropriate. The court noted that the individual sentences had been restructured to achieve the overall term of imprisonment, and that there was no basis to interfere with the sentence imposed.

No orders were made by the Court of Appeal, as the appeal was dismissed. The defendant's convictions and sentence were upheld.