||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 298 (May)
||Court of Appeal, Criminal Division
Maurice Kay LJ, Elias J and Judge Barker QC
||Thomas Bayliss QC and Christopher Tehrani (assigned by the Registrar of Criminal Appeals) for the defendant.
||Paul Worsley QC and Sharon Beattie (instructed by the Crown Prosecution Service) for the Crown.
||20 May 2004
Criminal evidence and procedure - Evidence - Similar fact evidence - Rape - Judge admitting evidence as similar fact - Correctness of decision.
In the circumstances of the instant case, the judge had erred in admitting evidence of a witness under the doctrine of similar fact evidence since the similarity between the evidence of that witness and the evidence of the complaint of rape alleged in the indictment had been in respect of matters admitted by the defendant; in respect of the rape, however, the evidence of the witness was strikingly dissimilar to that of the complainant and was irrelevant. Moreover, the evidence of the witness had introduced avoidable prejudice.
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary