Mr BL

Mr BL was convicted in August 1998 of rape and indecent assault. Mr BL received a sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment.

The CCRC received an application for review of the conviction in April 2005.

Mr BL submitted that two prosecution witnesses – a doctor and a police officer – should not have been permitted at trial to give evidence of “recent complaint”.

Mr BL argued that the accounts relayed by these witnesses were inconsistent with the evidence of the complainants.

Although the CCRC rejected this submission, its investigation found that there had been a misdirection at trial.

Although the judge told the jury that the complaint evidence was relevant to consistency, he did not state specifically that the evidence was not independent evidence of the truth of the complainants’ accounts.

The CCRC concluded that there was a real possibility that the Court of Appeal would find that the “recent complaint” direction given to the jury was inadequate.

Furthermore, there was a real possibility that the Court of Appeal would quash Mr BL’s conviction because the court could not be sure that the jury would inevitably have convicted Mr BL had they been properly directed in relation to recent complaint.

The CCRC referred the conviction in February 2006.

The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction in February 2007.