Hilly, R. v

Hilly, R. v

There was no proper evidential basis for asserting previous complaints were false; the judge correctly refused cross-examination, and the conviction is safe.

Parties
Appellant: Salaam David All Hilly; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Rape, Sexual Offences, Cross Examination, False Complaints, Credibility of Witness
Criminal Law Rape Sexual Offences Cross Examination False Complaints Credibility of Witness

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

Parties

Salaam David All Hilly

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing to allow cross-examination of the complainant regarding alleged previous false complaints of sexual abuse
  2. 2 Whether there was a proper evidential basis for asserting previous complaints were false
  3. 3 Whether the conviction is unsafe due to exclusion of such cross-examination

Ratio Decidendi

There was no proper evidential basis for asserting previous complaints were false; the judge correctly refused cross-examination, and the conviction is safe.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • conviction upheld