Scully, R. v [2013] EWCA Crim 2288 (05 December 2013)
The jury's conviction on count 2 was supported by the appellant's admission and independent evidence of assault, while acquittals on counts 1 and 3 could rationally be explained by insufficient evidence; the combined 'Watson' and majority direction did not create undue pressure on the jury; the sentence was justified by the gravity of the offence and the evidence.
- Citation
- [2013] EWCA Crim 2288
- Parties
- Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Mark Christopher Scully
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 05 December 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From Crown Court
- Outcome
- Appeal against conviction dismissed; application for leave to appeal sentence refused.
- Legal Topics
- Sexual Offences, Appeals, Jury Directions, Sentencing
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Regina
Respondent
Mark Christopher Scully
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From Crown Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the conviction on count 2 (assault by penetration) was logically inconsistent with acquittals on counts 1 and 3
- 2 Whether the judge's combined 'Watson' and majority direction rendered the verdict unsafe
- 3 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive
Ratio Decidendi
The jury's conviction on count 2 was supported by the appellant's admission and independent evidence of assault, while acquittals on counts 1 and 3 could rationally be explained by insufficient evidence; the combined 'Watson' and majority direction did not create undue pressure on the jury; the sentence was justified by the gravity of the offence and the evidence.
Court Disposition
Appeal against conviction dismissed; application for leave to appeal sentence refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment