R v FAV

The appellant was convicted of two counts of rape and the appeal against the conviction was dismissed by the Court of Appeal. The appellant was acquitted of a charge of indecent assault. The trial judge had directed the jury on the defence of mistake of fact in relation to count 2, but not count 1. The appellant's trial counsel did not address the jury on the defence of mistake of fact in respect of count 2, and the appellant argued that this was a miscarriage of justice. The appellant also argued that the trial judge should have directed the jury on mistake of fact in relation to count 1, and that the trial judge's direction on lies in the appellant's record of interview was an error of law.

The court considered whether the trial judge should have directed the jury on mistake of fact in relation to count 1, and whether the trial judge unduly restricted the appellant's trial counsel's address to the jury in relation to mistake of fact in respect of count 2. The court found that the trial judge did not err in directing the jury on mistake of fact in relation to count 2, but not count 1, as the only evidence that could be relied upon for mistake of fact was that of the complainant. The court also found that the trial judge did not unduly restrict the appellant's trial counsel's address to the jury in relation to mistake of fact in respect of count 2. The court found that the appellant's trial counsel's failure to address the jury on mistake of fact in respect of count 2 did not amount to a miscarriage of justice. The court found that the trial judge's direction on lies in the appellant's record of interview was not an error of law.

The appeal was dismissed. The court found that the trial judge did not err in directing the jury on mistake of fact in relation to count 2, but not count 1, and that the trial judge did not unduly restrict the appellant's trial counsel's address to the jury in relation to mistake of fact in respect of count 2. The court found that the appellant's trial counsel's failure to address the jury on mistake of fact in respect of count 2 did not amount to a miscarriage of justice. The court found that the trial judge's direction on lies in the appellant's record of interview was not an error of law. The court found that the conviction was safe and the appeal was dismissed.