R v Grimley

The case of R v Grimley involved the appellant who was charged with five counts of rape involving the same complainant, a 15-year-old girl. The jury convicted the appellant on counts 2, 3, and 4, and on the alternative count of indecent treatment for counts 1 and 5. The appellant appealed against his convictions of rape, arguing that the verdicts were unreasonable, the trial judge did not adequately direct the jury on the issue of consent, and that there was a miscarriage of justice due to the non-disclosure of the complainant’s victim impact statement.

The court was required to determine whether the jury should have been left in doubt about whether the complainant was consenting to the conduct alleged in count 3, or if the appellant honestly and reasonably believed she was consenting. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the trial judge should have further directed the jury on the issue of consent and if the non-disclosure of the complainant’s victim impact statement could have made a difference to the outcome.

The court found that the jury’s verdict demonstrated that they were not persuaded by the entirety of the complainant’s evidence, as her credibility was substantially diminished by revelations in her cross-examination. The appellant was convicted on parts of her evidence which were not specifically challenged and were supported by other evidence. The court concluded that the availability of the victim impact statement could not have made a difference to the outcome. The court allowed the appeal against the conviction on count 3, as it was not a verdict that was reasonably open on the evidence, and acquitted the appellant of rape on that count. The court convicted the appellant on count 3 of an offence of unlawfully and indecently dealing with the complainant, being a child under the age of 16 years. The appeal against the convictions on counts 2 and 4 was dismissed.