Col v R

The appellant, Col, was convicted of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and appealed against his conviction. The case was heard in the court of appeal. The central issue was whether the trial judge had erred in admitting the victim's statement to the police, which was later retracted by the victim, into evidence. The appellant argued that the use of the retracted statement resulted in a miscarriage of justice. Additionally, the appellant claimed that the evidence disclosing consciousness of guilt should not have been used and that a Zoneff direction was necessary. The court also considered whether the verdict was unreasonable or could not be supported by the evidence.

The court of appeal examined the trial judge's decision to admit the retracted statement. It noted that the statement was relevant and probative, and the trial judge had not erred in admitting it. The court also found that the use of the retracted statement did not result in a miscarriage of justice. Regarding the evidence of consciousness of guilt, the court held that it was properly admitted and did not prejudice the appellant. The court further determined that a Zoneff direction was not required and that the verdict was reasonable and supported by the evidence. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the conviction was upheld.