29/07/2013

Delivery | Westlaw India

Page1

*132 Frank Tatam Court of Criminal Appeal 24 January 1921 (1921) 15 Cr. App. R. 132 Avory J. Salter J. Greer J. January 24, 1921 Boys under the age of fourteen years cannot be accomplices in sodomy. Cratchley, 9 Cr. A. R. 232, 1913, followed. Appellant was convicted at Winchester Assizes, on 2nd December, 1920, for sodomy and for gross indecency, and sentenced by Lord Coleridge J. to eight years' penal servitude and fourteen days' imprisonment with hard labour to run concurrently. He appealed against conviction and sentences. W. A. Donald , for appellant (under s. 10 of the Criminal Appeal Act ), who was present, urged that three of the boys with whom appellant had committed sodomy were under fourteen years of age and that they were accomplices. The learned judge failed to caution the jury that corroboration was necessary before accepting the evidence of boys of tender years. He submitted that the conviction should be quashed. Walter Lloyd , for the Crown, submitted that there was no need of corroboration. Boys under fourteen years of age could not be convicted of felony and therefore could not be regarded as accomplices in law. Yet there was corroboration of gifts of money to some of the boys, which appellant admitted. All these facts were before the jury. It is true that the learned judge omitted to caution the jury. See Cratchley, 9 Cr. A. R. pp. 232235 : 1913. Salter J.: In this case the jury were not warned by the learned judge to be careful in accepting the evidence of children, one of whom was over fourteen years of age and three under that age. With regard to the three younger boys, with whom the appellant committed sodomy, we are of opinion that they cannot be accomplices, being unable at law to commit that offence. Further, there was corroboration in respect of the gifts of money. In the case of the eldest boy, who was over fourteen, there was some evidence not muchthat he was an accomplice, and there should have been a warning by the learned judge at the trial. We are satisfied that there has been no miscarriage of justice, and we do not think it right to quash the conviction in this case. [ 1 Hale P. C. 669 ; East P. C. cap. I.] In regard to the sentence of fourteen days' imprisonment with hard labour passed on four counts of the indictment for gross indecency, that will be quashed, on the ground that the acts of gross indecency are the same as the acts of sodomy for which sentence of penal servitude has been passed. With regard to the sentence for sodomy, we are satisfied that it is not too severe having regard to a previous sentence of five years' penal servitude for a like offence, and to the fact that there are statements from sixteen other boys similar in character to those made by the four boys concerned in the present case.

29/07/2013

Delivery | Westlaw India

Page2

Appeal dismissed: one sentence quashed .