R v Gibb CA475/03

David Ronald Gibb was convicted in the High Court on August 28, 2003, on two counts of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection, one count of rape, and one count of doing an indecent act. Gibb was sentenced to 11 years in prison on November 19, 2003, and now appeals against his conviction. The appeal grounds are that the jury's verdict was unreasonable and against the weight of the evidence, and that the trial judge erred in his summing up.

The legal issues the court was required to decide were whether the verdict was unreasonable and against the weight of the evidence, and whether the trial judge erred in his summing up. The court found that the evidence from the complainant was consistent with what one would expect of a seven-year-old child, and that there was clear evidence from the complainant that the offences alleged occurred, supported by the recent complaint evidence. The court also found that the trial judge gave an entirely proper direction to the jury on the law as it stands, and that the jury acquitted the appellant in respect of certain charges, making it clear that the jury had no difficulty in distinguishing between the evidence of various children.

The appeal against the appellant's convictions is dismissed. The court found that the evidence from the complainant was consistent with what one would expect of a seven-year-old child, and that there was clear evidence from the complainant that the offences alleged occurred, supported by the recent complaint evidence. The court also found that the trial judge gave an entirely proper direction to the jury on the law as it stands, and that the jury acquitted the appellant in respect of certain charges, making it clear that the jury had no difficulty in distinguishing between the evidence of various children.