R v Bland No. Sccrm-01-21

In the case of R v Bland, the appellant appealed against both his conviction and sentence for the offence of rape. The trial court had convicted the appellant of having sexual intercourse with the complainant without her consent. The complainant, who was intellectually disabled and had marked physical disabilities, alleged that the appellant had fixed a kitchen cupboard in her home before engaging in sexual intercourse with her without her consent. The appellant argued that the trial judge had erred in several respects, including finding that there was a case to answer, failing to discharge the jury due to an allegedly unfair final address by the Crown prosecutor, and that the verdict was unsafe and unsatisfactory. The appellant also appealed against his sentence.

The court considered the grounds of appeal against conviction and determined that the trial judge was correct in finding that there was a case to answer, as the evidence was capable of supporting a conviction. The court found that the jury was in a position to conclude that the appellant realised that the complainant suffered from an intellectual disability and physical disabilities, and that her lack of protest could be explained by her disabilities. The court also found no error in the trial judge's summing-up and that the prosecutor's final address was not unduly emotive or prejudicial. The court concluded that the evidence provided a sufficient basis for a finding of guilt on the offence charged and dismissed the appeal against conviction.

Regarding the appeal against sentence, the court found that the sentence imposed was appropriate given the seriousness of the offence. The appellant had no previous convictions, but the court considered the seriousness of the allegations and the lack of contrition on the part of the appellant. The court dismissed the appeal against sentence.