R v W

The appellant was convicted on three counts of sexual assault and acquitted on three other counts. The complainant's evidence regarding the dates of the offences was deemed unreliable, leading to the acquittal on the latter counts. The appellant appealed against both the conviction and the sentence. The primary issues were whether the unreliable evidence regarding the dates of counts 4 to 6 rendered the complainant's evidence about counts 1 to 3 unreliable, and whether evidence of uncharged offences could be used as background material for the jury. Additionally, the appeal questioned the severity of the sentence imposed.

The court examined the reliability of the complainant's evidence and found no reason to doubt the credibility of her testimony regarding counts 1 to 3, despite the unreliability of her evidence about counts 4 to 6. It was determined that evidence of uncharged offences could be used to provide context for the jury, provided it was relevant and not prejudicial. The court also considered the sentence to be excessive and granted the application to reduce it.

The appeal against the conviction was dismissed, as the evidence was deemed reliable for the counts in question. However, the application for leave to appeal against the sentence was granted, and the sentences were set aside. In their place, the court imposed a sentence of six months imprisonment on each count, suspended after two months, with an operational period of two years.

The final orders of the court were to dismiss the appeal against conviction but to grant the application for leave to appeal against the sentence. The sentences imposed were set aside and replaced with a sentence of six months imprisonment on each count, suspended after two months, with an operational period of two years.