The Court of Appeal has dismissed R. O’B.’s appeal against convictions for multiple sexual offences against five members of his family.
The judgment, delivered on 18 December 2025, upheld convictions returned after a Central Criminal Court trial held between 20 February and 6 March 2023.
R. O’B. was convicted on 63 counts, including rape, indecent assault and sexual assault. The offences concerned two sisters, a niece and two daughters and related to periods between 1975 and 2011.
He received life sentences on 18 rape counts involving one of his daughters. Other concurrent sentences ranged from 12 months to 11 years, with a further group of four-year terms ordered to run from the lawful end of an 11-year sentence.
The appeal challenged, among other matters, the decision to allow complainants to give evidence remotely. Four of the five did so following a prosecution application, while the defence had consented to remote evidence from one daughter.
The Court of Appeal said there is no absolute right for an accused person to insist that a witness give evidence in the courtroom. The normal position remains that trials are conducted in person, but a judge may allow remote evidence for good reason where doing so does not create demonstrable unfairness.
The court reviewed medical evidence concerning the complainants. It included cancer treatment and infection risk in one case, and significant anxiety, depression and other physical or mental health difficulties in others.
The judges found no specific prejudice to R. O’B. arising from the use of remote evidence. They rejected the argument that such arrangements were justified only where a witness’s ability to give evidence would otherwise be impaired.
The court held that ill-health, including psychiatric illness, could itself provide a proper basis for allowing evidence remotely in a sensitive sexual-offence trial.
The appeal was dismissed. The convictions and sentences therefore remain in place.