R v Barlien

The appeal against Eivin Barlien's convictions was dismissed by the Court of Appeal. Barlien had been convicted of sexual offences against three girls. The appeal focused on section 35 of the Evidence Act 2006 and whether the Judge was correct to admit evidence of the previous consistent statements of two of the complainants. Barlien argued that the evidence should not have been led and that therefore his convictions in relation to those complainants should be set aside. The Court held that the evidence was inadmissible under section 35 of the Act. However, the Court found that the inadmissibility did not lead to a miscarriage of justice because the substance of the statements was before the jury in any event. The Court noted that the judgment highlighted some issues with section 35 of the Act.