R v N, SH

The appeal in *R v N, SH* concerned a conviction in the District Court for two counts of persistent sexual exploitation against a child, involving the appellant's step-daughter and step-granddaughter. The appeal was heard by Sulan, Anderson and David JJ.

The central legal issues before the Court of Appeal were whether separate trials should have been ordered for the two counts, whether the trial judge erred in failing to seek special findings from the jury regarding the pleaded particulars of the offences, whether certain photographs tendered as evidence were inadmissible, and whether the verdict of guilty on the second count was unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence.

The Court found that the similarity between the two counts was not sufficiently probative to justify their joint admission as evidence for each other, and therefore separate trials should have been ordered. Furthermore, the judge erred in admitting the photographs without adequately directing the jury on their use. While the Court considered the evidence in relation to the second count, it concluded that it was open to the jury to be satisfied of the appellant's guilt on that count.

Ultimately, the appeal was allowed, and the convictions were set aside. The Court ordered retrials on each count, to be conducted separately.