Case: Derek A

A was convicted of raping and assaulting his ex-girlfriends daughter (Z) while on a trip to Scotland. Z gave evidence and described events in some detail. At trial, doctors testified to signs that Z had been sexually interfered with but they were unable to identify the perpetrator. Evidence was also given by Zs mother and a police officer who interviewed her. On appeal, evidence was introduced to show that Z had extensive knowledge of sexual matters for other reasons, that she had previously made allegations against her teachers that had been found to be groundless, and that Zs mother had said of A that if she could not get him one way she would “get him another.” The police were aware of all of this evidence prior to the trial, but did not disclose it to the defence. On the basis of this non-disclosed information, the court found that there was a formidable case to question the safety of the convicitons. This was said to throw the conviction into real doubt, and the convictions were quashed.