Key Facts
- •Paul Shinn, a teacher, was convicted of sexual activity with a child under 13, sexual activity with a child, and causing a child to watch a sexual act.
- •The offenses involved multiple children, some in the UK and some in the UAE.
- •The appeal challenged the admission of evidence from a previous acquitted case (involving MR) and the cumulative effect of other evidence.
- •The appeal also challenged the length of the 12-year extended determinate sentence (10 years custody, 2 years extended licence).
Legal Principles
Similar fact evidence (now bad character evidence under the Criminal Justice Act 2003) is admissible if relevant to prove guilt, even if from a previous acquittal.
Z [2000] 2 AC 483
A judge must exercise discretion to admit or exclude evidence under Section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 or Section 101(3) of the 2003 Act, considering fairness to all parties. There is no burden of proof on the prosecution in this exercise.
Hajdarmataj [2019] EWCA Crim 303; R(Saifi) v Governor of Brixton Prison [2001] 1 WLR 1134
Bad character evidence should not be admitted if it leads to substantial interference with the jury's focus on the indicted charges.
O’Dowd [2009] EWCA Crim 905
Outcomes
Appeal against conviction dismissed.
The evidence from the previous acquitted case (MR) was relevant to rebut fabrication claims and showed propensity. While transcripts from the previous trial were unavailable, sufficient other material was presented to ensure a fair trial. The cumulative effect of other bad character evidence did not unduly prejudice the appellant; it was relevant to the facts of the charged offenses.
Appeal against sentence dismissed.
The sentence was not manifestly excessive considering the overall criminality and harm caused to multiple victims. The judge's approach to sentencing individual counts was justified.