R v Harris (John)
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | LORD JUSTICE EDMUND DAVIES |
| Judgment Date | 25 March 1969 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1969] EWCA Crim J0325-12 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Docket Number | 7836/68 |
| Date | 25 March 1969 |
[1969] EWCA Crim J0325-12
The Lord Chief Justice of England (Lord Parker)
Lord Justice Edmund Davies
and
Mr. Justice Caulfield
7836/68
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
THE APPLICANT was not brought up and was not represented.
John Harris appeared at the Manchester Crown Court in November of last year and was there convicted of indecent assault on a 14 year old boy, and buggery of that boy. For the indecent assault he was sentenced to five years, and for the buggery a concurrent term of seven years. It was also ordered that a suspended sentence of six months for attempted false pretences imposed in July 1968 at Wiltshire Quarter Sessions take effect consecutive to the other sentence, so that he has to serve a total term of 7 ½ years. After refusal by the single Judge, he now applies to this Court for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence.
The facts are that the 14 year old boy gave evidence that he and his friend of about the same age shared the bed of the Applicant in a house in Manchester on the 20th September of last year. The 14 year old complainant had never met the Applicant before, and he deposed that during the night he woke up to find the Applicant playing with his private parts, and then the Applicant proceeded to bugger him. The boy struggled and he tried unsuccessfully to wake the other boy who was sleeping alongside him, but who had taken some tablets shortly before. Next morning the Applicant went with these boys to Bristol where the Police stopped them. The evidence of the other boy was to the effect that they had shared the bed, he had not known what was happening because of the sleeping tablets he had taken, but the next day the Applicant said that he had done rude things to the 14 year old boy, Begley, during the night. There were discrepancies between the evidence of the two boys as to the description of the bed and one or two other matters. Both boys denied the Applicant's allegation that they had threatened him with knives in the train, apparently on the way to Bristol, but each agreed he had bought a knife that morning.
Begley's father said that he asked the Applicant on the Saturday if he had seen the boys; the Applicant said he had seen them early on the Friday morning but made no mention of their sharing his bed on the Friday night. A Dr. Kerr gave evidence that he examined the 14 year old boy some 60 hours after the alleged act of buggery and found that he had been subjected to such acts on a number of occasions, one of which had occurred about 48 hours or possibly as much as seven days before. There was evidence from the people who kept the house in Manchester of letting a room on the Friday to this Applicant. The Police Officer at Bristol said that at first the Applicant denied knowing the boys at all, and said he had not been to Manchester for months, and had slept the Friday night at the home of his sister, Mrs. McDonald. Another Officer was told that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Derek Cort Appellant v The Queen Respondent
...the jury of both the second act of sexual intercourse and the act of buggery. 41 The Crown relied on the Court of Appeal's findings in R v John Harris. 23 In that case the appellant was convicted on two counts, one count of buggery and the other of indecent assault, in relation to the same ......
-
Itzaz Nafeez Akhtar v The Queen
...of authority which does not involve alternative offences but which is based on what is perceived to be the overall interests of justice. In R v Harris 53 Cr App R 376, the Court of Appeal (Lord Parker CJ, Edmund Davies LJ, Caulfield J) considered an application for leave to appeal a convict......
-
Richard John Pollett and Others v R
...here, with charges in the alternative leading to a multiplicity of convictions. That as this court pointed out in the case of R v Harris [1969] 1 WLR 745 cannot be right. It is not right." 34 Pollett as time has gone by has adopted different positions. At trial he first appeared to accept t......
-
R v Oleksandr Romanenko
...which arose here, with charges in the alternative leading to a multiplicity of convictions. That, as this court pointed out in the case of R v Harris [1969] 1 WLR 745 cannot be right. It is not right.” 40 In R v Harris [1969] 1 WLR 745 the defendant had been charged with both indecent ass......
-
Recent Judicial Decisions
...OFFENCES OR ONER. v. Harris[1969]2 All E.R. 599 CourtofAppealHarris was convicted of buggery and indecent assault. He wassentenced to seven years' imprisonment for the buggery and fiveyears' concurrent for the assault. He appealed against the convictionand sentence. Edmund Davies, L.J., in ......