R v Bee

The appellant appealed his conviction for several counts of sexual offences against two complainants, sisters, over a period from 2010 to 2013. The appellant was found guilty of maintaining a sexual relationship with one complainant (Count 1), carnal knowledge with a child under 16 (Count 2), indecent treatment of a child under 16 (Count 3), and rape (Count 4). He was acquitted of indecent treatment of the second complainant (Count 5). The appeal was based on three grounds: the handling of "similar fact" evidence at trial, the trial judge's directions regarding statements made during a pre-text call and via Instagram, and the reasonableness of the jury's verdict on Count 4 (rape).

The legal issues before the court were whether the evidence of each complainant was sufficiently similar to justify its admission on a "similar fact" basis, whether the trial judge correctly directed the jury on the use of the pre-text call and Instagram statements, and whether the jury's verdict on Count 4 (rape) was unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence. The court examined the evidence to determine if there was a striking similarity that would justify the admission of similar fact evidence. It also considered whether the trial judge's directions regarding the pre-text call and Instagram statements were adequate and whether the jury's verdict on Count 4 was reasonable.

The court found that the evidence of the two complainants shared a strong degree of similarity in the initiation of interactions with the appellant and their content prior to sexual contact, which justified its admission. The court also determined that the trial judge's directions on the pre-text call and Instagram statements were sufficient, as the appellant did not challenge the authenticity of the statements. Finally, the court concluded that the jury's verdict on Count 4 was reasonable, as the evidence supported the conclusion that the appellant's act was non-consensual.

The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction was upheld.