Widdows, R. v

Widdows, R. v

The conviction was unsafe because the incidents did not amount to a course of conduct constituting harassment within the meaning of the Act, the joinder of the harassment charge with rape charges was inappropriate, and the jury was not adequately directed on the requirements of harassment.

Parties
Appellant: Regina; Respondent: David Roger Widdows
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Harassment, Joinder of Charges, Sufficiency of Jury Directions, Protection From Harassment Act 1997

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Appellant

David Roger Widdows

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction

  1. 1 Whether the conviction under section 4 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 was safe given the nature of the relationship and incidents alleged
  2. 2 Whether it was appropriate to join a section 4 harassment charge with charges of rape
  3. 3 Whether the judge's summing up and jury directions were adequate regarding the requirements of harassment

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction was unsafe because the incidents did not amount to a course of conduct constituting harassment within the meaning of the Act, the joinder of the harassment charge with rape charges was inappropriate, and the jury was not adequately directed on the requirements of harassment.

Court Disposition

conviction quashed

Orders

  • appeal allowed
  • conviction under section 4 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 quashed