Beale, R v [2019] EWCA Crim 665 (28 March 2019)

Beale, R v [2019] EWCA Crim 665 (28 March 2019)

The appeal against conviction was refused because the trial judge was not required to give rape myths and stereotypes guidance to the jury in a case of false allegations, as the guidance is directed at complainants, not defendants, and the prosecution case was based on strong independent evidence. There was no evidential basis that media reporting prejudiced the jury or the fairness of the trial. The sentence of ten years was stern but justified given the exceptional seriousness, persistence, and impact of the offending, and was not manifestly excessive.

Citation
[2019] EWCA Crim 665
Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant/defendant: Jemma Beale
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed
Legal Topics
Perjury, Perverting the Course of Justice, Sentencing, Rape Myths and Stereotypes, Anonymity and Reporting Restrictions
Criminal Law Perjury Perverting the Course of Justice Sentencing Rape Myths and Stereotypes Anonymity and Reporting Restrictions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Jemma Beale

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred by failing to direct the jury on rape myths and stereotypes in a case of false rape allegations
  2. 2 Whether the loss of anonymity and media reporting prejudiced the fairness of the trial
  3. 3 Whether the sentence of ten years' imprisonment was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal against conviction was refused because the trial judge was not required to give rape myths and stereotypes guidance to the jury in a case of false allegations, as the guidance is directed at complainants, not defendants, and the prosecution case was based on strong independent evidence. There was no evidential basis that media reporting prejudiced the jury or the fairness of the trial. The sentence of ten years was stern but justified given the exceptional seriousness, persistence, and impact of the offending, and was not manifestly excessive.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction and sentence dismissed