Kirk v R

Kirk v R

The Court held that the trial judge was entitled to admit the evidence of complaints under Section 120 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, that the admission of bad character evidence was justified in the context of the case, that the exclusion of cross-examination about the abortion was within the judge's discretion and did not cause unfairness, that the jury were properly directed on the law and facts, and that the sentences imposed were not manifestly excessive given the seriousness and persistence of the offending.

Parties
Appellant: Peter Kirk; Appellant: Terence Kirk; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From Crown Court
Outcome
Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Indecent Assault, Rape, Admissibility of Evidence, Bad Character Evidence, Cross Examination Limits, Delay in Complaint, Collusion, Sentencing
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Indecent Assault Rape Admissibility of Evidence Bad Character Evidence Cross Examination Limits Delay in Complaint +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Kirk

Appellant

Terence Kirk

Appellant

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From Crown Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in admitting evidence of complaints made years after the alleged offences under Section 120 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in admitting evidence of bad character relating to incidents not charged in the indictment
  3. 3 Whether the judge wrongly excluded cross-examination of a complainant about an abortion under Section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the trial judge was entitled to admit the evidence of complaints under Section 120 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, that the admission of bad character evidence was justified in the context of the case, that the exclusion of cross-examination about the abortion was within the judge's discretion and did not cause unfairness, that the jury were properly directed on the law and facts, and that the sentences imposed were not manifestly excessive given the seriousness and persistence of the offending.

Court Disposition

Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed

Orders

  • Convictions of Peter Kirk and Terence Kirk upheld
  • Sentence of 11 years imprisonment for Peter Kirk upheld