Practice and Procedure

R v D (2013)

PUBLISHED September 10, 2013

Although the delay in the appellant's prosecution for historic sexual offences was extreme, the resulting missing evidence was not of a degree of cogency that could amount to a finding of serious prejudice in its absence. The trial judge had given the jury appropriate directions regarding the effect of the delay and the appellant's convictions were safe.

CA (Crim Div) (Treacy LJ, Hickinbottom J, Nicol J)