The Court of Appeal has upheld the conviction of FN for sexually assaulting a six-year-old neighbour when FN himself was aged 14.
FN was convicted in the Central Criminal Court on 22 December 2020. He had faced two charges involving two young brothers. The jury disagreed on an allegation of rape involving the younger, four-year-old boy, while convicting FN of sexually assaulting his six-year-old brother. FN was later placed under probation supervision.
The sexual assault allegation arose from an incident in April 2019. The older boy told specialist interviewers that FN pulled down his trousers and underpants, put him on his stomach and slapped his bare buttocks up to nine times. The boys were neighbours and there was evidence that they had previously played and engaged in mock fighting.
FN argued that there was insufficient evidence of sexual motive or indecent intent, suggesting the incident was potentially consistent with chastisement rather than sexual assault. The Court of Appeal rejected the argument that the prosecution had to prove a specific sexual motive.
The court said the relevant question was whether the circumstances, viewed objectively, were indecent. FN’s youth and the history of play-fighting were relevant, but so too were the removal of the younger child’s clothing, the exposure of intimate areas and the repeated slapping. Those matters were properly left to the jury.
FN also challenged the approximately 20-month period between the alleged incident and trial. The appeal court stressed that cases involving very young complainants and accused persons should be prioritised, particularly where both are children.
However, it found no demonstrated prejudice here. The allegation was relatively straightforward, a complaint had been made promptly, and the jury heard the complainant’s recorded specialist interview without subsequent cross-examination.
The court therefore found no error in allowing the trial to proceed and dismissed the appeal against conviction.