R v Pollitt

The case of R v Pollitt involves an appeal by the appellant against his conviction and sentence for attempted abduction with the intention to have sexual intercourse and indecent behaviour. The appellant was found guilty by a jury of these offences, which were committed on 29 June 2005 at Greenock. The appeal was brought on several grounds, including the sufficiency of evidence, the adequacy of the trial judge's directions to the jury, and the safety of the verdicts. The central issue before the court was whether the trial judge had properly directed the jury on the specific intent required for the offence of attempted abduction and whether the verdicts were reasonable and safe given the evidence presented.

The court considered whether there was sufficient evidence for the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had attempted to abduct the complainant with the intention of having sexual intercourse with her. The court also examined the trial judge's directions to the jury concerning the specific intent required for the offence of attempted abduction. It was found that while there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdicts, the trial judge had erred in not adequately directing the jury on the necessary intent for the offence of attempted abduction. Consequently, the court concluded that the appeal should be allowed in respect of the charge of attempted abduction, and a retrial was ordered. However, the appeal against the conviction for the offence of indecent behaviour was dismissed as the court found the verdict to be safe and satisfactory.

In summary, the court allowed the appeal in relation to the charge of attempted abduction due to the trial judge's inadequate direction to the jury concerning the required intent, and ordered a retrial for this offence. The appeal against the conviction for the offence of indecent behaviour was dismissed, and the original verdict and conviction on this charge were upheld.