Campbell, R v [2016] EWCA Crim 597 (13 April 2016)

Campbell, R v [2016] EWCA Crim 597 (13 April 2016)

The trial judge correctly applied the law and was entitled to conclude that there was no proper evidential basis for asserting the falsity of the complainant's previous allegations. The material relied upon by the applicant did not justify permitting the proposed cross-examination under either section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 or section 100 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The convictions were not rendered unsafe by the exclusion of this evidence.

Citation
[2016] EWCA Crim 597
Parties
Respondent: Regina; Applicant: Wayne Campbell
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction refused
Legal Topics
Rape, Sexual Offences, Cross Examination of Complainant, Admissibility of Evidence, Bad Character Evidence, Section 41 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, Section 100 Criminal Justice Act 2003
Criminal Law Rape Sexual Offences Cross Examination of Complainant Admissibility of Evidence Bad Character Evidence Section 41 Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 Section 100 Criminal Justice Act 2003

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Wayne Campbell

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in refusing leave to cross-examine the complainant about previous allegations of sexual misconduct under section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 and section 100 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
  2. 2 Whether there was a proper evidential basis for asserting that the complainant's previous allegations were false, justifying their admissibility as bad character evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge correctly applied the law and was entitled to conclude that there was no proper evidential basis for asserting the falsity of the complainant's previous allegations. The material relied upon by the applicant did not justify permitting the proposed cross-examination under either section 41 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 or section 100 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The convictions were not rendered unsafe by the exclusion of this evidence.

Court Disposition

renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction refused