JENKINS RICHARD MAXWELL

JENKINS RICHARD MAXWELL

The prosecution proved all essential elements of the offences beyond reasonable doubt by credible and consistent child testimony corroborated by medical evidence and exhibits; the amended charges were properly made without causing prejudice; procedural objections (preliminary inquiry, deposition requirement, absence of interpreter) did not cause miscarriage of justice; the accused's denial and late defenses (coaching, threats, erectile dysfunction) were uncorroborated and thus insufficient to create reasonable doubt, warranting conviction.

Citation
BC-62JSK-115-08/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Defendant: Jenkins Richard Maxwell
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
2 October 2025
Case Number
BC-62JSK-115-08/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Offences Against Children / Judgment and Sentencing
Outcome
Accused convicted of offences under Section 14(a) read with Section 16 of the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017 and Section 376(3) of the Penal Code; sentenced as below.
Legal Topics
Rape, Sexual Assault, Abuse of Trust, Child Witness Competence, Amendment of Charges, Sentencing Principles
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Child Protection Evidence Law Rape Sexual Assault Abuse of Trust Child Witness Competence +2 more

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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Jenkins Richard Maxwell

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Offences Against Children / Judgment and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved offences under Section 14(a) read with Section 16 of the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017 and Section 376(3) Penal Code beyond reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether amendment of charges under Section 158 CPC was lawful and prejudicial
  3. 3 Whether child witness evidence was competent and required deposition under CPC/ SOACA

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution proved all essential elements of the offences beyond reasonable doubt by credible and consistent child testimony corroborated by medical evidence and exhibits; the amended charges were properly made without causing prejudice; procedural objections (preliminary inquiry, deposition requirement, absence of interpreter) did not cause miscarriage of justice; the accused's denial and late defenses (coaching, threats, erectile dysfunction) were uncorroborated and thus insufficient to create reasonable doubt, warranting conviction.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted of offences under Section 14(a) read with Section 16 of the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017 and Section 376(3) of the Penal Code; sentenced as below.

Orders

  • BC-62JSK-114-08/2022 Charge 1 (amended): 6 years imprisonment from date of arrest (to run concurrently with other terms in this case)
  • BC-62JSK-114-08/2022 Charge 2 (amended): 10 years imprisonment from date of arrest and 10 strokes of the cane (to run concurrently with Charge 3)