25 Jul 2019
The Court of First Instance concluded the magistrate had erred in disbelieving the appellant and his fianc e9e without adequate basis; their account and the WhatsApp exchanges were at least as consistent with sexsomnia-induced amnesia as with conscious guilt, rendering the conviction unsafe; appeal allowed and conviction and sentence set aside.
23 Feb 2015
The magistrate's credibility findings were reasonable on the evidence; prosecution proved intent beyond reasonable doubt because the appellant was observed taking goods and the goods were recovered from her bag; the expert only suggested automatism was possible and defence failed to prove absence of intent; conviction is therefore safe; however the original six month sentence was disproportionate in context and reduced to three months imprisonment.
21 Aug 1992
The court held that the judge was correct both in law and fact: automatism predicated on voluntary ingestion of alcohol (including hypoglycaemia arising from that) is not available as a defence to attempted rape (a basic intent offence) and, alternatively, the evidence (lay and expert) did not establish the required evidential foundation to leave non-insane automatism to the jury.