The Court of Appeal has dismissed J.O’C.’s appeal against two convictions for sexually assaulting his granddaughter, rejecting challenges to the joint trial, a decision to leave one count to the jury and the jury’s verdicts.
The judgment, delivered by Ms Justice Donnelly on 26 January 2023, says the appellant had faced 22 counts involving two sisters, both described as his granddaughters. He was convicted by majority verdicts on two counts concerning the elder sister, relating to 2004 and 2005. The jury disagreed on two other counts concerning her. The trial judge directed acquittals on 11 further counts concerning her and six of the seven counts concerning the younger sister; the jury acquitted him on the remaining count concerning the younger sister.
The appellant argued that the indictment should have been split between the two complainants because trying the allegations together was unfair. The appeal court found the allegations were of the same nature, despite differences in how the complainants said the assaults occurred. It also found no basis to require separate trials over possible collusion or innocent mutual contamination. The court noted that the trial judge had not been asked to rule on that issue at trial.
The appellant also argued that all counts concerning the younger sister should have been withdrawn from the jury because of conflicts in the evidence about when visits to the home ended and when the alleged abuse could have occurred. The appeal court found no error in leaving count 16 to the jury: the alleged 2008 timing was mathematically possible on the evidence. The jury acquitted him on that count.
On the two convictions, the appellant argued that the jury’s different decisions on four counts concerning the elder sister were perverse because the allegations were not tied to specific events. The appeal court said jurors could accept or reject parts of a witness’s evidence. It considered the differences in the date ranges relevant: the convictions concerned 2004 and 2005, while the counts on which the jury disagreed concerned 2003 and 2006.
The court rejected all three grounds and dismissed the conviction appeal. The appellant withdrew his appeal against sentence at the hearing. The judgment does not state the sentence.