R v DD

In the matter of R v DD, the defendant was convicted of incest, an indecent act in the presence of a child under 16, and indecent assault. The case was heard by the court of criminal appeal. The complainant had initially provided evidence against the defendant but later made a statutory declaration recanting her evidence. She subsequently retracted this declaration. The central legal issue before the court was whether the defendant's convictions should be quashed due to a perceived miscarriage of justice and, if so, whether judgment and verdict of acquittal should be entered or a new trial directed.

The court considered the reliability and credibility of the complainant's initial and retracted evidence, as well as other available evidence in the case. The court found that the statutory declaration recanting the evidence was made under duress and lacked credibility. However, the court concluded that despite the recantation, the evidence against the defendant was sufficient to support the convictions. The court held that the convictions should be quashed due to the miscarriage of justice caused by the recantation. Given the nature of the recanted evidence and the remaining evidence, the court decided that a new trial should be directed to allow the defendant a fair opportunity to defend himself against the charges.

Consequently, the court quashed the defendant's convictions and directed a new trial to be held. This decision was based on the court's finding that the recanted evidence was unreliable and the remaining evidence was sufficient to support the convictions. The court emphasised the importance of ensuring a fair trial for the defendant and preventing miscarriages of justice in criminal proceedings.