R v HCM

In the case of R v HCM, the appellant was convicted by a jury of one count of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child and one count of indecent treatment of a child under 16, under 12, under his care. The appellant sought to appeal his conviction, raising several grounds for the appeal, including the improper admission or rejection of evidence, the verdict being unreasonable or not supported by the evidence, and misdirection or non-direction by the trial judge. The Court was required to consider whether the appellant's convictions should be set aside and a retrial ordered.

The Court considered the arguments put forward by the appellant and the binding authorities. It found that the trial judge failed to direct the jury to the need to be satisfied of the reliability and credibility of the complainant’s account, beyond reasonable doubt, which deprived the appellant of a fair chance of acquittal. The Court also found that the failure to explicitly direct the jury to consider each count separately did not deprive the appellant of a fair chance of acquittal. However, the Court agreed with the appellant that the trial judge erred in ruling that cross-examination of the complainant’s mother, as to the appellant’s reaction in the late night pretext call, was inadmissible.

The Court concluded that the appellant's convictions must be set aside and a retrial ordered on counts 1 and 2. The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the convictions on each of counts 1 and 2, and ordered a retrial on counts 1 and 2.