A majority conviction on an old sexual offence count based on recovered suppressed memory evidence may be quashed as unsafe where the evidence on the count convicted upon is no stronger than on counts where the jury could not agree, particularly where the memories emerged in circumstances suggesting innocent infection, there was no recent complaint, key aspects of the complainant's account were contradicted by other witnesses, and the trial judge reported concern that a grave injustice may have occurred.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.