R v Nealon
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
- LORD JUSTICE FULFORD
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
- Evidence Law
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The appellant was convicted of attempted rape in 1997, based on flawed identification evidence. Fresh DNA evidence in 2012 suggested another man's involvement. The appellant appealed, and the new evidence led to quashing of his conviction, highlighting the significance of reliable identification and fresh evidence in criminal proceedings.
Judgment
Lord Justice Fulford :
Introduction
On 22 January 1997 at Hereford Crown Court the appellant was convicted of the attempted rape of Ms Zoe E on 9 August 1996. On 12 March 1997, Jowitt J sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 7 years’ imprisonment. The Full Court dismissed his first appeal against conviction on 27 January 1998.
On 17 July 2012, the Criminal Cases Review Commission (“CCRC”) referred the appellant’s conviction to the Court of Appeal Criminal Division on the grounds of fresh DNA evidence (following the appellant’s third application to the CCRC). It is contended that the new evidence, in all the circumstances of the case, gives rise to a real possibility that the Court of Appeal will conclude that the appellant’s conviction is unsafe and ought to be set aside. Accordingly, the appellant invites the court to receive this fresh evidence.
The provisions of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 apply to this offence. No matter relating to the victim (“Ms E”) shall be included in any publication during her lifetime if it is likely to lead members of the public to identify her as the victim of this offence.
The Facts
The Witnesses at the Scene
It is helpful to indicate at the outset that the appellant has a distinctive pockmarked face.
Ms E
On 8/9 August 1996, Ms E had been celebrating her 22 nd birthday at the Rackets nightclub in Redditch. She was very drunk. About half an hour before she left she noticed that a man, who was about 20 feet away, was staring fixedly at her with what she interpreted as sexual interest. She particularly noted his intense gaze and a lump that was like a scratch on his forehead. He was notably older than most of the other men at the nightclub. She was unable to say if his face was pockmarked. Ms E left the club in the early hours of 9 August 1996 with a friend, Aimee Marshall (who had also consumed a considerable amount of alcohol), and as they walked towards the house of Ms E’s mother, they saw a man in the bushes who may have been urinating.
As the two women passed under a bridge, Ms E was seized from behind and a man began mauling her. Whilst she fought to free herself, he tried to kiss her and at this point Ms E realised it was the same man with the lump on his forehead who had been staring at her earlier. Ms E blanked out.
When she regained consciousness, Ms E was lying on a nearby verge with the man on top of her. His hand was inside her blouse, over her brassier