R v Ford

In the case of R v Ford, the Respondent was convicted of indecent assault of AG and ZM, and sexual intercourse without consent of TL. The Crown sought to introduce evidence of a tendency, under section 97 of the Evidence Act 1995, to commit sexual offences against young women under certain circumstances. The central issue was whether this evidence was admissible and had significant probative value. The Respondent argued that the evidence did not demonstrate a sufficient tendency to commit acts similar to those alleged, as required by the Act.

The court had to determine the admissibility of the tendency evidence, focusing on whether the evidence demonstrated a tendency to act in a particular way and had significant probative value. The Crown's tendency was described as a propensity to sexually molest young women who had stayed over at the Respondent's house, had consumed a significant amount of alcohol, were asleep, and where there was a risk of being discovered by others. Judge Sorby initially ruled that the evidence of TL was inadmissible in the trial concerning AG and ZM. However, the question of whether evidence of AG and ZM would be admissible in the trial concerning TL remained unresolved.

The Court of Appeal found that the evidence did not demonstrate a sufficient tendency to commit acts similar to those alleged. The differences in the nature of the sexual acts alleged against TL, AG, and ZM were significant enough to undermine the Crown's argument. The court held that the evidence did not show a tendency to act in a particular way, as the acts and circumstances were not similar enough. Therefore, the evidence did not have significant probative value, and the trial judge's decision to exclude it was upheld. The appeal was dismissed, and the convictions were quashed.