Charnock v R.

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.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mathew James Charnock

Applicant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal Against Conviction and Extension of Time

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution failed to meet its disclosure obligations regarding the complainant's mobile phone and social media records
  2. 2 Whether the trial process was inadequate due to the absence of the complainant's mobile phone evidence
  3. 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.