Her Majesty's Advocate v. L. [2007] ScotHC HCJ_16 (28 November 2007)

Her Majesty's Advocate v. L. [2007] ScotHC HCJ_16 (28 November 2007)

There was sufficient circumstantial evidence, taken at its highest, to allow a properly directed jury to convict, including distress and other factors. The submission of no case to answer was repelled. It was unnecessary to decide whether distress alone could corroborate the complainer's account of being asleep; the issue should be determined in a case where it is necessary to do so.

Citation
[2007] ScotHC HCJ_16
Parties
Applicant: Her Majesty's Advocate; Respondent: L
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Submission of No Case to Answer Under Section 97 of the Criminal Procedure (scotland) Act 1995
Outcome
Submission of no case to answer repelled; jury subsequently found charge not proven.
Legal Topics
Rape, Corroboration, Evidence, Mens Rea, Consent
Criminal Law Rape Corroboration Evidence Mens Rea Consent

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty's Advocate

Applicant

L

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Submission of No Case to Answer Under Section 97 of the Criminal Procedure (scotland) Act 1995

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence of complainer's distress alone is sufficient corroboration for lack of consent and mens rea in rape cases
  2. 2 Whether circumstantial evidence can corroborate complainer's account of being asleep during sexual intercourse

Ratio Decidendi

There was sufficient circumstantial evidence, taken at its highest, to allow a properly directed jury to convict, including distress and other factors. The submission of no case to answer was repelled. It was unnecessary to decide whether distress alone could corroborate the complainer's account of being asleep; the issue should be determined in a case where it is necessary to do so.

Court Disposition

Submission of no case to answer repelled; jury subsequently found charge not proven.