Practice and Procedure

R v C (2011)

PUBLISHED June 29, 2011

[2011] EWCA Crim 1607

Although cross-examination which had invited impermissible speculation by the defendant should not have been allowed, that was insufficient to support a conclusion that his conviction for rape, buggery and indecent assault was unsafe, there being no other basis on which to undermine the jury's acceptance of the significant DNA evidence.

CA (Crim Div) (Leveson LJ, Keith J, Judge Pert QC)