Admissibility of Fresh Evidence on Credibility in Criminal Appeals: Larkin v. [2020] EWCA Crim 1298

Introduction

The case of Larkin, R. v ([2020] EWCA Crim 1298) was adjudicated by the England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) on September 11, 2020. The applicant, a 56-year-old individual, was convicted in the Crown Court at Sheffield of assault occasioning actual bodily harm under section 47 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (count 3). He was acquitted of two counts of assault by penetration under section 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (counts 1 and 2). Following his conviction, he was sentenced to three years' imprisonment.

The applicant sought leave to appeal his conviction based on fresh evidence—a witness statement from Ms. Shireen Robinson. This commentary delves into the intricacies of the judgment, examining the court's analysis of the admissibility and credibility of the new evidence, and the subsequent decision to maintain the original conviction.

Summary of the Judgment

The Court of Appeal reviewed the applicant's request to admit Ms. Robinson's testimony as fresh evidence. The applicant argued that this evidence undermined the credibility of the prosecution's key witness, AB, thereby rendering the conviction unsafe. However, the court found Ms. Robinson's evidence to be unreliable and inadmissible under the relevant statutory provisions. Additionally, the court highlighted that the majority of issues related to AB’s credibility had already been thoroughly addressed during the original trial. Consequently, the court dismissed the application to admit the fresh evidence and upheld the original conviction, deeming it safe.

Analysis

Precedents Cited

The judgment references several legal provisions and precedents to assess the admissibility of fresh evidence:

Criminal Appeal Act 1968, Section 23: Governs the circumstances under which the Court of Appeal may receive new evidence. It outlines factors such as the credibility of the evidence, its potential impact on the appeal, its admissibility in the original proceedings, and explanations for its absence during the trial.
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992: Protects the privacy of sexual offense victims by prohibiting the publication of identifying information unless specifically waived.
Criminal Justice Act 2003, Section 114: Pertains to the admissibility of hearsay evidence, particularly in the context of criminal proceedings.

The court scrutinized these provisions to determine whether Ms. Robinson's evidence should influence the appeal's outcome.

Legal Reasoning

The court applied a structured analysis based on Section 23 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968, evaluating the fresh evidence against the following criteria:

Capable of Belief: The court assessed the reliability of Ms. Robinson's testimony, identifying inconsistencies in her statements and questioning her motives.
Affect Ground for Allowing Appeal: It was determined that even if Ms. Robinson's evidence were credible, it did not substantially alter the foundational issues established during the trial.
Admissibility in Original Proceedings: The court noted that the evidence would have been admissible under Section 114(1)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
Reasonable Explanation for Non-Adduction: The court found no satisfactory explanation for why Ms. Robinson's statement was not presented during the original trial, especially given the applicant's awareness of her potential testimony.

Ultimately, the court concluded that Ms. Robinson's evidence lacked credibility, was not sufficiently admissible, and did not provide a significant ground for overturning the original conviction.

Impact

This judgment underscores the stringent requirements for admitting fresh evidence in criminal appeals, particularly concerning credibility challenges. It emphasizes the necessity for appellants to present reliable and timely evidence and demonstrates the court's cautious approach in reassessing convictions based on new, potentially unreliable testimonies. Future cases may reference this judgment to evaluate the admissibility of similar evidence, reinforcing the importance of maintaining robust standards for evidence presentation.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Admissibility of Fresh Evidence

In criminal appeals, "fresh evidence" refers to information or testimonies that were not presented during the original trial. To be admissible, such evidence must meet specific criteria, ensuring it is reliable and relevant to the case.

Credibility of Witnesses

The credibility of a witness pertains to how believable and reliable their testimony is. Factors affecting credibility include consistency, motive to lie, and the witness's reliability in recounting events.

Hearsay Evidence

Hearsay refers to statements made outside the courtroom, presented to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Generally, hearsay is not admissible unless it falls under specific exceptions outlined in legal statutes.

Conclusion

The Court of Appeal in Larkin v. [2020] EWCA Crim 1298 reaffirmed the importance of stringent standards in admitting fresh evidence during criminal appeals. By meticulously evaluating the credibility and admissibility of Ms. Robinson's testimony, the court underscored that new evidence must not only be reliable but also significantly impactful to overturn existing convictions. This judgment serves as a pivotal reference for future cases, ensuring that the integrity of judicial decisions is maintained through rigorous scrutiny of all evidentiary submissions.