SC, R v [2018] NICA 39 (26 October 2018)

SC, R v [2018] NICA 39 (26 October 2018)

The conviction is unsafe because the non-disclosed material regarding the complainant's prior rape allegation and GP records was capable of affecting the jury's mind and assisting the defence, particularly as the complainant was the sole prosecution witness. Additional unease arose from undisclosed NEXUS engagement and inadequate jury direction on possible motive.

Citation
[2018] NICA 39
Parties
Prosecution: R; Applicant/defendant: SC
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
26 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Conviction Before Court of Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed; conviction quashed
Legal Topics
Non Disclosure, Unsafe Conviction, Sexual Offences, Cross Examination, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Evidence Procedure Non Disclosure Unsafe Conviction Sexual Offences Cross Examination Jury Directions

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R

Prosecution

SC

Applicant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Conviction Before Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether non-disclosure of material relating to the complainant's prior rape allegation rendered the conviction unsafe
  2. 2 Whether failure to disclose GP records and NEXUS engagement affected the fairness of the trial
  3. 3 Whether the jury was properly directed regarding possible motive for the complainant's allegations

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction is unsafe because the non-disclosed material regarding the complainant's prior rape allegation and GP records was capable of affecting the jury's mind and assisting the defence, particularly as the complainant was the sole prosecution witness. Additional unease arose from undisclosed NEXUS engagement and inadequate jury direction on possible motive.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; conviction quashed

Orders

  • Conviction quashed
  • No retrial ordered in this judgment