A leading authority now cited in both Archbold and Blackstone’s on issues including cross-admissibility in multi-complainant cases, s.41 YJCEA 1999 and s.100 CJA 2003.
The defendant was acquitted by a jury at trial on all counts, save two.
The Court of Appeal, Criminal Division allowed the appellant’s appeal against his convictions on the two remaining counts of rape, concerning allegations from two separate complainants.
The Court of Appeal ruled the convictions unsafe for reasons including deficiencies in the jury’s “route to verdict” document, the exclusion of key evidence affecting one complainant’s sexual history and credibility, and improper cross-admissibility rulings between the two cases.
The appellant’s convictions were quashed. He retained his good character.
