18 Jun 2018
Leave to bring a second appeal was declined because the appeal did not involve a matter of general or public importance and did not demonstrate a real risk of miscarriage of justice given the thorough factual findings by the trial Judge upheld on first appeal; the appeal against lifting of interim name suppression was dismissed.
15 Mar 2016
The Court declined to admit the proposed fresh evidence because it was neither credible (evidence of collusion and invented accounts) nor fresh (could have been obtained at trial); the complainant's testimony supported by medical evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find anal penetration; medical descriptions of injuries as consistent with pressure or force did not mislead the jury as they were expressly described as consistent but inconclusive of non-consensual sex; appeal dismissed.