M'Lennan v H. M. Advocate
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 16 March 1928 |
| Date | 16 March 1928 |
| Docket Number | No. 9. |
| Court | High Court of Justiciary |
Lord Justice-General, Lord Sands, Lord Blackburn.
Evidence in Criminal Cases—Sufficiency—Indecent practices towards boy of six—Corroboration of boy's evidence by evidence of his condition and statements by him de recenti.
A panel was tried before a Sheriff and jury upon an indictment which set forth certain lewd, indecent, and libidinous practices towards a boy six years of age. The boy gave evidence in support of the charge, and his father and mother deponed to the condition of his person and clothing shortly after the offence, and also to the statements which he had made to them de recenti. The Sheriff charged the jury that the evidence was sufficient in law to entitle them to convict, and the panel was convicted.
Held, on appeal, that the boy's evidence was sufficiently corroborated in law by the evidence of his parents, and that evidence of statements made by a victim de recenti afforded corroboration of that victim's evidence.
George Gordon M'Lennan, a painter, whose domicile of citation had been sisted as the Sheriff-Clerk's Office, Fort-William, was tried in the Sheriff Court there before the Sheriff-substitute (Steed-man) and a jury upon an indictment which set forth that he did, on 14th November 1927, and in a house in course of construction known as No. 13 Riverside Road, Kinlochmore, use certain lewd, indecent, and libidinous practices towards John M'Pake, a boy then aged five years and ten months. Having been found guilty and sentenced to nine months' imprisonment, he appealed to the High Court of Justiciary under section 1 (b) of the Criminal Appeal (Scotland) Act, 1926. The first ground of appeal, with which alone this report is concerned, was stated as follows:—That the Sheriff-substitute who tried the case misdirected the jury in law. He failed to direct the jury that the statements made by the boy to his parents were not corroboration of what the boy alleged took Place, and he proceeded to direct the jury that the evidence of the boy complainant, coupled with the evidence of the boy's parents, was sufficient evidence on which to convict the appellant.
The circumstances of the case, which are also referred to by the Lord Justice-General in his opinion, were these:—The first witness for the Crown was John M'Pake, the boy's father, who gave evidence regarding the finding of 2d. in the boy's pocket when he came home shortly after the occurrence of the alleged offence; and as to the state of the boy's person, which indicated interference, and of his clothing, which was disarranged. He also deponed to the account of the incident which the boy had given to him at the time. The second witness was the boy's mother, whose evidence was to the same effect as that of the father. The third witness was the boy himself, who told what had happened to him. His story was the same as that given by him to his parents according to their evidence. It also...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reference By Hma Against Clb
...the criticism of failure to do so.” Several cases are cited. These will be considered in due course. They include McLennan v HM Advocate 1928 JC 39, although it supports the alternative view, along with Anderson v McFarlane (1899) 1 F (J) 36, Morton and Burgh v HM Advocate 1944 JC 77. McLen......
-
Bill Of Suspension By Christopher O'shea Against Procurator Fical, Paisley
...made de recenti could provide corroboration of the complainer’s own testimony (McCrindle v MacMillan 1930 JC 56 and McLennan v HM Advocate 1928 JC 39). [32] In McLennan, a child of 6 had testified to being abused. Evidence about what he had said to his parents on returning home was admitted......
-
Morton v H. M. Advocate
...but was unable to identify the assailant. M'Crindle v. MacMillan, 1930 J. C. 56,overruled, and dicta in M'Lennan v. H. M. Advocate, 1928 J. C. 39, and Strathern v. Lambie, 1934 J. C. 137, disapproved. Henry Morton was tried before a Sheriff and jury in the Sheriff Court at Glasgow, on an in......