R v R

In this case, the Court of Appeal allowed the appeals against conviction on all three counts, quashed the convictions, and entered a verdict of not guilty on count 1. The Court ordered a retrial limited to charges of indecent assault on counts 2 and 3. The Court also refused the application for leave to appeal against sentence. The Court found that the trial miscarried due to the lack of particularity of the allegations with respect to each count, and the duplicity of evidence. The Court held that the appellant was not provided with adequate particulars of the offences charged, which resulted in an unfair trial and an unsafe verdict. The Court also found that the trial judge failed to identify and distinguish between evidence going to the offences charged and evidence of other misconduct. The Court concluded that the convictions on counts 2 and 3 were also unsafe and unsatisfactory due to internal inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence and the discrepancy between her evidence and the medical evidence. The Court considered that a new trial on counts 2 and 3 would be limited to charges of indecent assault. The Court also commented on the need for an extensive training programme for those involved in interviewing child complainants.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial miscarried due to the lack of particularity of the allegations and the duplicity of evidence. The Court held that the appellant was not provided with adequate particulars of the offences charged, which resulted in an unfair trial and an unsafe verdict. The Court also found that the trial judge failed to identify and distinguish between evidence going to the offences charged and evidence of other misconduct. The Court concluded that the convictions on counts 2 and 3 were also unsafe and unsatisfactory due to internal inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence and the discrepancy between her evidence and the medical evidence. The Court considered that a new trial on counts 2 and 3 would be limited to charges of indecent assault. The Court also commented on the need for an extensive training programme for those involved in interviewing child complainants.