Key Facts
- •In the early hours of November 11, 2022, AFJ assaulted HK, a young woman walking home alone.
- •AFJ followed HK, cornered her in an alleyway, and pushed her to the ground.
- •AFJ made threats to kill and stab HK, demanding her belongings, although he didn't attempt to take them.
- •CCTV footage captured part of the assault, showing AFJ restraining HK and saying something in her ear.
- •AFJ was arrested an hour later and charged with attempted robbery and assault with intent to commit a sexual offence.
- •AFJ pleaded guilty to attempted robbery but not guilty to the sexual assault charge.
- •The trial judge refused to admit evidence of AFJ's previous convictions for attempted rape, sexual assault, false imprisonment, and robbery (2009).
- •The trial judge ruled there was no case to answer on the charge of assault with intent to commit a sexual offence.
- •The prosecution appealed both rulings under section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
Legal Principles
A judge can only withdraw a case from a jury if no reasonable jury could convict based on the evidence.
Case law precedent (implied)
Bad character evidence should not be admitted to bolster a weak case (Hanson [2004] EWCA Crim 824).
Hanson [2004] EWCA Crim 824
The admissibility of bad character evidence depends on balancing probative value against prejudicial effect (Benabbou [2012] EWCA Crim 3088).
Benabbou [2012] EWCA Crim 3088
Appeals against rulings on no case to answer and admissibility of bad character evidence are governed by section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
Criminal Justice Act 2003, section 58
Outcomes
The Court of Appeal allowed the prosecution's appeal.
The trial judge understated the evidence supporting the charge of assault with intent to commit a sexual offence. The Court of Appeal found sufficient evidence for a jury to reasonably infer such intent. Further, the judge wrongly excluded evidence of AFJ's prior convictions due to an incorrect assessment of the prosecution's case strength.