Thompson, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 1146 (20 September 2024)

Thompson, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 1146 (20 September 2024)

The trial judge was wrong in law to withdraw counts 1 and 2 from the jury. Whether the touching was sexual and whether the inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence precluded conviction were matters for the jury, not for summary dismissal by the judge. There was sufficient evidence for a properly directed jury to consider the charges.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Crim 1146
Parties
Applicant: Rex; Respondent: Ricky Thompson
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Prosecution Appeal Against Terminating Ruling Under S.56 Criminal Justice Act 2003
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, No Case to Answer Submission, Appeal Against Terminating Ruling, Sexual Assault of a Child, Evidential Inconsistencies
Criminal Law Sexual Offences No Case to Answer Submission Appeal Against Terminating Ruling Sexual Assault of a Child Evidential Inconsistencies

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Applicant

Ricky Thompson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Prosecution Appeal Against Terminating Ruling Under S.56 Criminal Justice Act 2003

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in ruling there was no case to answer on counts 1 and 2 of sexual assault of a child under 13
  2. 2 Whether touching below the knee can amount to a sexual assault under s.7 Sexual Offences Act 2003
  3. 3 Whether inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence rendered the prosecution case untenable for jury consideration

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was wrong in law to withdraw counts 1 and 2 from the jury. Whether the touching was sexual and whether the inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence precluded conviction were matters for the jury, not for summary dismissal by the judge. There was sufficient evidence for a properly directed jury to consider the charges.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The prosecution's appeal is allowed.
  • The trial in the Crown Court is to resume on the relevant counts.