R v ABY 2024
In November 2011, the complainant, X, made allegations of sexual abuse that occurred over a 2-2.5-year period when she was aged between 10 and 13 years of age against her father, ABY.
In 2013, evidence heard in the original trial related to X’s mental health showed that X was diagnosed with an eating disorder in 2007 and since this date records suggest that X’s mental health deteriorated and caused her to self-harm and hear voices. In 2012 X spent 4 months in psychiatric hospital and was diagnosed with a complex Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.
At the time of the trial and during X’s ABE interviews were assessed by professional’s who gave evidence in the trial and was said that her mental state was generally good. The trial judge correctly identified that it was for the jury to determine the reliability and credibility of X.
The defence case was one of denial. ABY claimed that the most he had done was restrain X when she was attacking him or “trashing” her bedroom and asserted that her allegations were likely to be the product of her mental illness, pre-trial therapy and suggestion. The possibility of malicious allegations was also raised given that they had been made in the midst of a matrimonial breakdown.
ABY was convicted on the 22nd and 23rd May 2013 of six specimen counts of rape of a child under 13, three specimen counts of sexual assault of a child under 13, three specimen counts of cruelty to a person under 16.
An application was made to the Criminal Cases Review Commission ("the CCRC") in November 2018 on the basis that the conviction was no longer safe due to two issues that came to light after ABY’s trial.
- In 2015, X made allegations of a similar nature against P, a nursing assistant at her treatment facility, who was not convicted of the alleged offences.
- In 2016, X made an allegation against an unidentified person said to have committed a series of violent sexual offences against her.
Subsequent to the referral decision, in 2018 a further disclosure was made by the prosecution of a false allegation made to the police by X that she had been trafficked to England and suffered serious sexual exploitation and abuse. at a later time, in a further disclosure note, made at a time when X was a hospital patient having been admitted following an intentional overdose of medication, it was recorded that X accepted that aspects of that allegation were factually incorrect.
Held
Appeal dismissed. Conviction upheld.
X’s credibility was not undermined by allegations made in P’s trial, relating to the reliability of her complaints of sexual abuse. The defence argued that nursing notes and X’s evidence given in P’s trial, had undermined X’s credibility however the court found that X’s evidence was not irreconcilable to evidence given in ABY’s trial.
The impact of the later disclosure of the allegations against P had no impact on the evidence given nor the approach provided by clinicians in ABY’s trial.
If X did make a "conscious and deliberate" decision not to disclose P's abuse of her at the time of ABY’s trial, it may have been for any number of reasons and is not determinative of false allegations against ABY.
P being the first recipient of the allegation of abuse against ABY did not impact the evidence presented. The fact that X had made (different) allegations against P did not undermine her complaints against ABY. The evidence of X was already subject of a ‘Makanjoula’ direction and the fact of P’s acquittal was not admissible. There was nothing in any of the later disclosed allegations that undermined the safety of ABY’s convictions.
X’s competence was questioned by the defence and it was asserted that X was always unreliable due to her mental illness. The court did not accept this submission and expert evidence found her competent to give evidence at the time of ABY’s trial. The later allegations were suggestive of subsequent mental ill health, as appears confirmed in the chronology of corresponding hospital admission provided in the disclosure notes and do not establish lack of prior credibility or reliability in ABY’s trial.
View the full R v ABY 2024 case document here, with links to related legislation and similar cases.
