R v KING

The appellant was convicted of two counts of unlawful sexual intercourse with his stepdaughter, while being acquitted on seven other counts of similar offences and one count of indecent assault. The appeal against conviction argued that the trial should have been stayed due to the unavailability of two potential witnesses. It was further submitted that the Longman direction provided to the jury was inadequate and that the trial judge failed to give a direction in accordance with the decision in Black v The Queen. Additionally, it was argued that the verdicts of guilty on two counts were inconsistent with the acquittals on the other counts.

The court examined whether the decision not to stay the trial resulted in a miscarriage of justice. It considered whether the Longman direction was adequate and whether the trial judge was required to give a direction in accordance with Black v The Queen. The court also evaluated whether there was an inconsistency in the verdicts.

The court found that no miscarriage of justice resulted from the decision not to stay the trial. The Longman direction was deemed adequate, and there was no requirement to give a direction in accordance with Black v The Queen using any particular formula. The court also determined that there was no inconsistency in the verdicts. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.

No additional orders were made beyond the dismissal of the appeal.