Walker, R v

Walker, R v

The court held that Professor Conway's expert evidence on childhood amnesia and memory reliability did not fall within the strict limits of admissibility established in R v JH: R v TG, as neither case involved exceptional circumstances of highly detailed early childhood memories. The jury was capable of assessing witness reliability without expert input. The photographic evidence in Snell's trial was properly admitted as relevant to the appellant's sexual interest and left to the jury's assessment.

Parties
Prosecution: R; Applicant: Jonathan Charles Walker Snell; Applicant: Malcolm Wilson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
applications refused
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Admissibility of Expert Evidence, Childhood Memory, Fresh Evidence, Appeals Procedure
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Admissibility of Expert Evidence Childhood Memory Fresh Evidence Appeals Procedure

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Prosecution

Jonathan Charles Walker Snell

Applicant

Malcolm Wilson

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether expert evidence on childhood amnesia and memory reliability should be admitted as fresh evidence in sexual offence appeals involving childhood abuse
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting photographic evidence in Snell's trial

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that Professor Conway's expert evidence on childhood amnesia and memory reliability did not fall within the strict limits of admissibility established in R v JH: R v TG, as neither case involved exceptional circumstances of highly detailed early childhood memories. The jury was capable of assessing witness reliability without expert input. The photographic evidence in Snell's trial was properly admitted as relevant to the appellant's sexual interest and left to the jury's assessment.

Court Disposition

applications refused