HM Advocate v ER

Criminal evidence and procedure – Mutual corroboration – Moorov doctrine. High Court of Justiciary: Upholding a submission of no case to answer by an accused who was charged with, inter alia, assault and rape, and who contended that there was an insufficiency of evidence in respect of three charges concerning alleged events in mid-1980's, involving one complainer, and three charges relating to alleged events in 2012/13, and involving another complainer, the court could not identify any feature so striking, unusual, or extraordinary, such as might justify the application of the Moorov doctrine notwithstanding the long time interval, and it concluded that this was a Moorov case that should be removed from the jury on an insufficiency of evidence based on an excessive time lapse and it acquitted the accused of the relevant charges accordingly.

Category: