The Court of Appeal has dismissed N.R.’s appeal against his conviction on 63 counts of indecent assault, rejecting three challenges to the conduct of his trial. The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Edwards on 29 January 2018, addresses conviction only; the appeal against sentence was outside its scope.
N.R. was convicted by a jury on 15 April 2016 after a four-day trial. The counts concerned three complainants, identified in the judgment as Ms A, Ms B and Ms C. Their evidence was that the assaults occurred when they were children. The judgment records allegations of abuse at homes in Town A and Town B, and at a shed in Town A. The complainants’ evidence was challenged in cross-examination, including on dates, locations and whether particular incidents occurred.
N.R. argued that the charges involving each complainant should have been tried separately because the evidence did not have a sufficient connection and its prejudicial effect outweighed its value. The prosecution submitted that the evidence was admissible as system evidence. The Court of Appeal agreed there was a clear basis for asserting a system in the alleged offending and held that the trial judge was right to refuse separate trials. It dismissed this ground.
A second ground concerned a complainant’s reference during testimony to an alleged assault that was not charged. The trial judge refused an application to discharge the jury and considered that a direction could address the matter if necessary. The appellate court held that the issue had been dealt with quickly and correctly. It said discharging the jury would have been disproportionate and found no unfairness in the decision not to draw specific attention to the reference in the jury charge. This ground was also dismissed.
The final ground challenged prosecution counsel’s closing description of aspects of the complainants’ allegations as identical in nature. The Court of Appeal found the comment fair in light of the evidence and noted the trial judge had told jurors they were responsible for the facts and were not bound by counsel’s speeches. It also noted that no complaint had been made at trial and no requisition raised. The court dismissed this ground as well.
Having rejected all three grounds, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal against conviction. The judgment does not determine the separate appeal against sentence.