A N M V. Her Majesty's Advocate
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Lord Justice General,Lady Cosgrove,Lord Carloway |
| Neutral Citation | [2010] HCJAC 112 |
| Published date | 10 November 2010 |
| Date | 02 November 2010 |
| Docket Number | XC820/09 |
| Court | High Court of Justiciary |
| APPEAL COURT, HIGH COURT OF JUSTICIARY | |
| Lord Justice General Lord Carloway Lady Cosgrove | [2010] HCJAC 112 Appeal No: XC820/09 OPINION OF THE COURT delivered by THE LORD JUSTICE GENERAL in Appeal by ANM Appellant; against HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE Respondent: _______ |
Appellant: Paterson, Solicitor Advocate; Paterson Bell, Kirkcaldy
Respondent: Young, Q.C., A.D.; Crown Agent
2 November 2010
[1] The appellant was convicted after trial of having committed in his youth various sexual crimes of which his two sisters, FM and CM, were the victims. These included the rape of FM on various occasions between 1968 and 1976, when she was between the ages of 4 and 12, and the attempted rape of CM on various occasions between 1972 and 1978, when she was between the ages of 4 and 10. The charge in respect of CM had originally been one of rape, but before addressing the jury the Advocate depute, with the leave of the court, restricted that charge to one of attempted rape. That was against the circumstance that in evidence CM was unable to say that penetration of her vagina had actually taken place. She spoke to repeated acts of the appellant's penis having been rubbed against her vagina, of his apparently trying to penetrate her vagina with it and of not being sure whether he had ever in fact effected penetration. If there had been any penetration, it would have been very slight. What he would do, she said, was to rub his penis against her vagina and ejaculate on her stomach.
[2] For corroboration of the rape and of the attempted rape charges, the Crown relied on the doctrine of mutual corroboration. There was ample evidence of the external factors of similarity of time, place and circumstance required for the application of the doctrine: the ages of the girls at the relative times were similar and the periods of the offences overlapped, they all occurred in the family home and were committed by a brother on his two sisters. The only issue arising in this appeal is whether the conduct in relation to CM (in law, attempted rape) was incapable of corroborating FM's evidence of rape of her, she having spoken to having on repeated occasions been penetrated vaginally.
[3] Mr Paterson, who appeared for the appellant, acknowledged that authority was against him. In PM v Jessop 1989 SCCR 324 the appellant was convicted of attempted sodomy on an 11 year-old boy and of sodomy of an 8 year-old boy; the boys were brothers and the appellant their cousin. It...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
M.r. V. Her Majesty's Advocate
...Cases referred to: AK v HM AdvocateSCUNK [2011] HCJAC 52; 2012 JC 74; 2011 SLT 915; 2011 SCCR 495; 2011 SCL 744 ANM v HM AdvocateUNK [2010] HCJAC 112; 2011 SCCR 47; 2011 SCL 271; 2010 GWD 37-757 Advocate (HM) v CoxSC 1962 JC 27 Advocate (HM) v Kennedy 5 December 1963, unreported Advocate (H......
-
C W Appellant Against HM Advocate Respondent
...2 thereof. The appellant subsequently appealed to the High Court of Justiciary against conviction. Cases referred to: ANM v HM Advocate [2010] HCJAC 112; 2011 SCCR 47; 2011 SCL 271; 2010 GWD 37–757 AS v HM Advocate [2014] HCJAC 135; 2015 SCCR 62; 2015 SCL 245; 2015 GWD 1–9 B v HM Advocate s......