M, R. v [1997] EWCA Crim 523 (20 February 1997)

M, R. v [1997] EWCA Crim 523 (20 February 1997)

The jury could rationally distinguish between the two counts, being satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant deliberately and indecently assaulted the complainant by inserting his finger into her anus without consent, but not being satisfied to the same standard regarding the charge of rape. The verdicts...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[1997] EWCA Crim 523
Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: M
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 February 1997
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Indecent Assault, Rape, Inconsistent Verdicts, Appeal Procedure
Criminal Law Indecent Assault Rape Inconsistent Verdicts Appeal Procedure

Source-derived case record

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

M

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the conviction for indecent assault was unsafe or inconsistent with the acquittal for rape
  2. 2 Whether the jury's verdicts were logically inconsistent or irrational

Ratio Decidendi

The jury could rationally distinguish between the two counts, being satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant deliberately and indecently assaulted the complainant by inserting his finger into her anus without consent, but not being satisfied to the same standard regarding the charge of rape. The verdicts were not logically inconsistent or irrational, and the conviction was safe.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed