R v W, GC (No 2)

In the case of R v W, GC (No 2), the appellant, W, appealed against his convictions on two counts of unlawful sexual intercourse. The dispute arose from the appellant's conviction by a jury, which he challenged on several grounds. The legal issues before the court were whether the appellant should be acquitted on count one due to the alleged non-existence of the statutory offence at the relevant time, whether the Judge failed to provide appropriate directions regarding the onus of proof, whether the Judge failed to adequately warn about the delay, and whether the Judge failed to sufficiently assist the jury in assessing the complainant's credibility.

The court found that the appellant's conviction on count one was invalid as the jury could not have returned a verdict for an offence that was not charged. Additionally, the court determined that the Judge's directions regarding the onus of proof were inadequate, as they did not clearly warn the jury about the risks of convicting based solely on the complainant's evidence, particularly given the delay in reporting the incident. The Judge also failed to adequately address the serious implications of the evidence provided by a witness, who contradicted the complainant's account, thereby affecting her credibility. These misdirections and failures to adequately assist the jury led to the conclusion that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred.

The appeal was allowed by the court. The conviction on count one was set aside, and it was left to the Director of Public Prosecutions to decide whether to lay a fresh information regarding the incident. The conviction on count two was also set aside, and a retrial was ordered. The court's decision emphasized the importance of clear judicial directions and proper assessment of evidence, particularly concerning the credibility of complainants and the implications of delays in reporting.