R v Werry

The applicant, Werry, appealed against his conviction for engaging in sexual acts with a child under the age of 16. The case was heard in the Court of Appeal, which was required to determine whether the trial judge gave adequate directions regarding the proof that Werry had no reasonable grounds to believe the victim was under 16, and whether the trial judge should have directed the jury that proof of uncharged acts must be beyond reasonable doubt when the evidence was not intended to prove a sexual interest or relationship.

The primary legal issues were whether the trial judge sufficiently instructed the jury on the standard of proof required to establish that Werry had no reasonable grounds to believe the victim was under 16, and if the trial judge should have directed the jury that any uncharged acts must be proven beyond reasonable doubt when the evidence was not presented to demonstrate a sexual interest or relationship. The applicant argued that the trial judge's directions were inadequate and prejudicial.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the application for leave to appeal. The court found that the trial judge had given adequate directions to the jury concerning the standard of proof required to establish that Werry had no reasonable grounds to believe the victim was under 16. The court also held that the trial judge was not required to direct the jury that proof of uncharged acts must be beyond reasonable doubt in circumstances where the evidence of those acts was not led to prove a sexual interest or relationship. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction was upheld.

No further orders were made by the Court of Appeal beyond dismissing the application for leave to appeal.