AS v R.

AS v R.

The convictions on the sample counts are unsafe because, having acquitted on all specific counts based on the same evidence, a reasonable jury could not be sure of guilt on the sample counts. The lack of particulars and the absence of a specific jury direction regarding the impact of not guilty verdicts on the sample counts rendered the convictions unsafe.

Parties
Appellant: AS; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; no retrial ordered
Legal Topics
Rape, Inconsistent Verdicts, Sample Counts, Jury Directions, Unsafe Convictions
Criminal Law Rape Inconsistent Verdicts Sample Counts Jury Directions Unsafe Convictions

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

AS

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge should have upheld a submission of no case to answer due to inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence
  2. 2 Whether the convictions on sample counts are unsafe and illogically inconsistent with acquittals on specific counts

Ratio Decidendi

The convictions on the sample counts are unsafe because, having acquitted on all specific counts based on the same evidence, a reasonable jury could not be sure of guilt on the sample counts. The lack of particulars and the absence of a specific jury direction regarding the impact of not guilty verdicts on the sample counts rendered the convictions unsafe.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; no retrial ordered

Orders

  • Convictions quashed
  • Any ancillary orders set aside