Boxer, R v

Boxer, R v

The trial judge was entitled to admit the ABE interview as evidence in chief despite breaches of guidance, as the complainant gave a coherent and clear account in response to open questions. The judge's directions to the jury not to speculate were sufficient, and there was no basis to discharge the jury. The differential verdicts were not illogical given the evidence and editing of the DVD. The conviction was safe.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Michael Boxer
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Evidence, Jury Directions, Appeals
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Evidence Jury Directions Appeals

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Michael Boxer

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ABE interview should have been excluded due to breaches of guidance
  2. 2 Whether jury speculation about the appellant's character rendered the trial unfair
  3. 3 Whether the jury should have been discharged due to speculation

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to admit the ABE interview as evidence in chief despite breaches of guidance, as the complainant gave a coherent and clear account in response to open questions. The judge's directions to the jury not to speculate were sufficient, and there was no basis to discharge the jury. The differential verdicts were not illogical given the evidence and editing of the DVD. The conviction was safe.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed