27 Nov 2017
Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed grounds either rehashed matters already considered and rejected by the Court of Appeal or advanced new contentions that did not disclose any arguable merit, and the sentencing challenge did not raise matters of public or general importance or an appearance of miscarriage of justice.
22 Dec 2016
The Court held the guilty verdict on the rape charge was not unreasonable: the complainant's evidence together with contemporaneous records and complaints provided a sufficient evidential basis for a reasonable jury to convict; the acquittals on other counts did not render the verdict inconsistent; and although the Judge's stated reasons for declining a s122 warning were flawed, the failure to give the warning was not clearly erroneous and did not cause a miscarriage of justice because the Judge properly directed the jury on credibility and reliability and the jury's verdicts showed they appl…
18 Oct 2016
The Judge correctly exercised his s122 discretion by declining to give a reliability warning because the complainant's inconsistencies related to peripheral timing issues rather than the substance of the allegations, the summing-up fairly and adequately directed the jury on assessing reliability and credibility, and a warning risked improperly influencing the jury; accordingly the convictions were not shown to be unsafe and the appeal fails.