Guthrie, R. v

Guthrie, R. v

The trial judge was entitled to refuse leave for cross-examination under section 41 as the alleged previous sexual encounters lacked sufficient similarity and chronological nexus; the judge correctly admitted previous convictions as evidence of propensity to violence under section 101(1)(d) and (g); the directions regarding hearsay evidence from the brother were proper and left the issue to the jury.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Germaine Guthrie
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Rape, Admissibility of Evidence, Bad Character Evidence, Hearsay Evidence, Cross Examination, Propensity Evidence
Criminal Law Rape Admissibility of Evidence Bad Character Evidence Hearsay Evidence Cross Examination Propensity Evidence

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Germaine Guthrie

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing leave to cross-examine the complainant about alleged ongoing sexual relationship under section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting the appellant's previous convictions as evidence of propensity to violence and use of weapons under section 101(1)(d) and (g) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
  3. 3 Whether the trial judge's directions regarding hearsay evidence from the appellant's brother were unfair

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to refuse leave for cross-examination under section 41 as the alleged previous sexual encounters lacked sufficient similarity and chronological nexus; the judge correctly admitted previous convictions as evidence of propensity to violence under section 101(1)(d) and (g); the directions regarding hearsay evidence from the brother were proper and left the issue to the jury.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed