R v Trevor Tanner

R v Trevor Tanner

The trial judge erred in rejecting the submission of no case to answer because there was insufficient evidence that the complainant suffered serious alarm or distress with a substantial adverse effect on her usual day-to-day activities during the indictment period. The conviction for aggravated stalking cannot stand, but the evidence supports a conviction for the lesser offence of stalking under section 2A.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Trevor Tanner
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
appeal allowed in part; conviction for aggravated stalking quashed; conviction for stalking substituted; sentence imposed
Legal Topics
Stalking, Harassment, Appeal Against Conviction, No Case to Answer, Reopening Prosecution Case, Substitution of Verdict
Criminal Law Stalking Harassment Appeal Against Conviction No Case to Answer Reopening Prosecution Case Substitution of Verdict

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Trevor Tanner

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in rejecting a submission of no case to answer for aggravated stalking under section 4A of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution should have been permitted to reopen its case and recall the complainant to give further evidence
  3. 3 Whether the evidence established serious alarm or distress with substantial adverse effect on the complainant's day-to-day activities

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred in rejecting the submission of no case to answer because there was insufficient evidence that the complainant suffered serious alarm or distress with a substantial adverse effect on her usual day-to-day activities during the indictment period. The conviction for aggravated stalking cannot stand, but the evidence supports a conviction for the lesser offence of stalking under section 2A.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part; conviction for aggravated stalking quashed; conviction for stalking substituted; sentence imposed

Orders

  • Conviction for aggravated stalking under section 4A quashed
  • Conviction for stalking under section 2A substituted