R v WCH

In the case of R v WCH, the appellant contested his convictions for five counts of indecent treatment of a child under 16, who was his daughter, under the care of the appellant. The complainant was between the ages of three and eight during the alleged offending. The appellant appealed his convictions, arguing that the verdicts were unreasonable or could not be supported by the evidence presented. The crux of the appeal hinged on the reliability and consistency of the complainant's testimony, which was entirely dependent on the jury's acceptance of her account.

The court examined whether, despite any inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence, the jury was justified in concluding that the appellant's guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt. The complainant's evidence included a recorded interview with the police, and two pre-recorded testimonies. The court referenced R v Allen to highlight the importance of considering the unique factors affecting the reliability of a child's testimony. The court found that the jury was entitled to rely on the complainant's earliest account, as it was likely to be the most accurate, and was also entitled to accept her later affirmations of the truth of her earlier statements.

The Court of Appeal concluded that the appellant had not demonstrated that the jury's verdicts were unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence. The judges independently assessed the evidence and found that the jury was justified in accepting the complainant's testimony and convicting the appellant. The appeal was dismissed, and the convictions were upheld.