Where child complainant evidence is characterised by suggestibility, leading questions in police interviews, materially advancing and altering accounts between interview and trial, inconsistencies with adult evidence, absence of corroborating medical evidence, and compromise verdicts, the combination of these factors may render convictions unreasonable. The attempted rape verdicts were unreasonable where the jury rejected penile penetration but there was no evidence of any physical act short of penetration or any thwarted intention to penetrate. Failure to give the s 21AW(2) direction regarding support persons for child witnesses giving pre-recorded evidence remains an error capable of producing a substantial miscarriage of justice.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.