22 Nov 2018
224542fb-cebd-4869-9a7f-8e3a57606375.pdf
- Citation
- openlaw-d6369ccb_09e5_415b_a995_38510427c5b4.pdf
- Court
- Court of Appeal
The trial judge materially misdirected the jury on consent and reasonable belief in consent, requiring quashing of convictions for sexual violation; s234 Criminal Procedure Act 2011 applied because the substituted offences (sexual connection with a young person) could have been proven at trial and the jury must have been satisfied of the facts underlying those offences, so convictions were entered for five substituted charges; sentencing was remade with a starting point of 5.5 years increased for aggravating features then reduced by 25% for mitigation yielding four years' imprisonment concurr…