The Court of Appeal has dismissed R.S.’s appeal against convictions on 25 counts of rape and sexual assault, holding that the jury’s assessment of the complainants’ credibility was for it to make and that the evidence was not tenuous.
R.S. was convicted by majority verdict on 2 July 2015 of eight rape counts and 17 sexual assault counts. The offences concerned two complainants and were said to have occurred during the 1990s, when R.S. was in a relationship with their mother. One sexual assault count concerned the first complainant when she was 12; the remaining counts concerned the second complainant over a period when she was aged 10 to 14. R.S. received a nine-year prison sentence on 28 July 2015.
The sole ground of appeal was that the jury’s verdicts were perverse, unsound and unsafe. R.S.’s submissions challenged the reliability of the complainants’ accounts, including the timing and withdrawal of an earlier complaint, inconsistencies about disclosures, and evidence about later family relationships and contact. The submissions also relied on R.S.’s denials and on evidence that the second complainant had apologised. The prosecution argued that credibility and evidential weight were matters for the jury, which had heard the witnesses.
Delivering the court’s judgment on 17 October 2017, Mr Justice Hedigan said an appeal court could set aside a verdict for perversity only in exceptional circumstances, and that the threshold was high. The court said it could not replace the jury’s assessment of witnesses with its own view based on the trial transcript.
The judgment said the first complainant maintained her allegation under cross-examination and explained that she had earlier withdrawn it to avoid hurting her mother or sister. The jury believed her account and rejected contrary evidence from R.S., the court said. As to the second complainant, the judgment noted that she maintained her account under cross-examination. It also referred to a text message sent by R.S. on 9 April 2010 and a letter to the complainants’ mother, both apologising for what had happened with the complainants, which the court said were capable of corroborating her evidence.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. It did not alter the convictions or sentence.