Charnock v R.
The trial process compensated for the absence of the complainant's mobile phone. Defence counsel utilised available messaging evidence in cross-examination, and the judge's summing up was adequate. The court cannot speculate about missing evidence, and the conviction is not unsafe.
- Parties
- Applicant: Mathew James Charnock; Respondent: Regina
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 02 February 2021
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Against Conviction and Extension of Time
- Outcome
- Application for extension of time and permission to appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Disclosure Obligations, Sexual Offences, Abuse of Process, Fair Trial, Consent
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Mathew James Charnock
Applicant
Regina
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Against Conviction and Extension of Time
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution failed to meet its disclosure obligations regarding the complainant's mobile phone and social media records
- 2 Whether the trial process was inadequate due to the absence of the complainant's mobile phone evidence
- 3 Whether defence counsel and the trial judge failed to address the prejudice to the applicant arising from lack of disclosure
Ratio Decidendi
The trial process compensated for the absence of the complainant's mobile phone. Defence counsel utilised available messaging evidence in cross-examination, and the judge's summing up was adequate. The court cannot speculate about missing evidence, and the conviction is not unsafe.
Court Disposition
Application for extension of time and permission to appeal dismissed.
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