H, R. v

H, R. v

The appeal against conviction is dismissed because the inconsistencies in witness evidence were not so fundamental as to require withdrawal from the jury, the trial process complied with fair trial requirements, the judge's intervention was not prejudicial, the direction on rape ingredients was adequate, and the refusal to issue a witness summons was justified.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: 'H'
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 April 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
Rape, Sexual Offences, Fair Trial, Youth Defendants, Sentencing, Witness Summons, Practice Direction, Consent
Criminal Law Child Protection Human Rights Rape Sexual Offences Fair Trial Youth Defendants Sentencing +3 more

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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

'H'

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether inconsistencies in witness evidence required withdrawal of case from jury
  2. 2 Whether trial process was unfair to the young defendant and violated right to fair trial
  3. 3 Whether judge's intervention during cross-examination prejudiced the trial

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal against conviction is dismissed because the inconsistencies in witness evidence were not so fundamental as to require withdrawal from the jury, the trial process complied with fair trial requirements, the judge's intervention was not prejudicial, the direction on rape ingredients was adequate, and the refusal to issue a witness summons was justified.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • Sentence of 18 months' detention under section 91 Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 upheld.
  • Order disqualifying appellant from working with children for an indefinite period upheld.