Court of Appeal
| Published date | 01 October 2004 |
| DOI | 10.1350/jcla.68.5.365.43221 |
| Date | 01 October 2004 |
| Subject Matter | Court of Appeal |
Court of Appeal
Similar Fact Evidence: Directions
R v Carman [2004] EWCA Crim 540
The appellant, C, a doctor and general practitioner, stood trial on 10
counts of indecent assault, allegedly committed against numerous dif-
ferent patients who had consulted him at his surgery at various points
between 1983 and 2002.
The alleged indecent assaults (so far as is relevant here) were sepa-
rated by the court into three different groups.
Group 1 (Counts 1, 6 and 10)
Each count involved a different complainant who had been examined
by C on a couch in a room at the surgery. Each complainant was told to
remove her lower clothing in readiness for an internal examination.
During the examination that followed, it was alleged that C rubbed each
complainant intimately (specifically in the clitoral area) for between 15
seconds and 2 minutes and, in the words of one of them, ‘he mastur-
bated me basically’.
C agreed that he had carried out internal examinations on the three
complainants, but denied any impropriety. It was admitted that there
may have been accidental contact of a particularly intimate nature, but
insofar that it was suggested this type of contact lasted for periods of
between 15 seconds and 2 minutes, C maintained complete denial.
Group 2 (Counts 3, 4, 5 and 9)
Counts 3, 4 and 5 concerned the same complainant and it was alleged
that on each of the three separate occasions concerned, C, during the
course of an examination, pressed his groin area into her legs. Count 9
concerned a different complainant and, again, it was alleged that during
the course of an examination, C pressed his groin area up against her
side for about a minute.
In all cases, each complainant was able to feel C’s genitals pressed
against her body.
C denied any improper touching and said if there was contact of the
type described by the complainants, then it was simply an accidental
consequence of a proper examination.
Group 3 (Counts 2 and 7)
The remaining two counts concerned different complainants who each
alleged that C had made improper and unnecessary contact with her
breasts during examinations. C denied any improper touching of the
type described, but repeated his assertion that if there was contact, then
it had been accidental.
365
To continue reading
Request your trial