• DOI:10.1177/002201837303700206
• Corpus ID: 220186573

House of Lords

@article{1973HouseOL,
  title={House of Lords},
  author={},
  journal={The Journal of Criminal Law},
  year={1973},
  volume={37},
  pages={125 - 126}
}

• Published 1 April 1973
• Law, History
• The Journal of Criminal Law

TH E House of Lords (1972, 3 W.L.R. 910) has now reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal (1972, 3 W.L.R. 719; 37 i.C.L. 42) in this case, but has upheld the dismissal of the appeal on the (different) ground that the conviction was unsafe and unsatisfactory. The respondent was charged under s.14 ( 1) of the Sexual Offences Act, 1956 with indecent assault on a girl of twelve. She gave evidence on oath, but the testimony of her nine-year old sister was given unsworn under s.38 of the Children and Young Persons Act, 1933, which provides that a court may receive the evidence, though not given on oath, of a child of tender years, provided that where evidence is given by virtue of that section, the defendant shall not be convicted "unless that evidence is corroborated by some other material evidence in support thereof implicating him". The deputy chairman instructed the jury that the unsworn evidence could amount in law to corroboration of the sworn evidence. The respondent's consequent conviction was quashed by the Court of Appeal on the ground that that direction was wrong. The point of law of general public importance certified by the Court of Appeal was in terms of that question--eould the evidence of an unsworn child, under s.38, corroborate that of the sworn child ?-but the House of Lords pointed out that the res-pondent's conviction depended on the answer to a further question:In order that the accused could be liable to conviction, could the evidence of the unsworn child be corroborated by that of the sworn child ? In R. v. Manser (25 Cr. App. Rep. 18), the Court of Appeal rejected as circular the argument that, where sworn evidence is said to be corroborated by unsworn evidence, that unsworn evidence (which requires corroboration) can in turn be corroborated by the sworn evidence. The court thus rejected the claim that there can be such "mutual corroboration". The House of Lords has now doubted the validity of that case and has approved, instead, the decision in R. v. Campbell (1956, 2 Q.B. 432). Thus, the evidence of an unsworn child, admitted under s.38 of the Act of 1933, can amount