Well that nicely and pompously put me back in my box, prh, didn't it?
My last post was not attempting to put you back in your box. My sincere apologies if that is how I came across. I was just trying to explain the importance the courts attach to the presumption of innocence and the rights of the accused. Perhaps I phrased it badly. I understand that you disagree with the decision made by the Court of Appeal. That is fine. You have every right to do so. I can set out the process by which they arrive at their decisions and the weight they give to certain considerations such as the presumption of innocence. I can say what I think the judges are driving at in their judgement although, without a transcript, it is difficult to be certain (and it may be difficult even with a transcript). But I cannot convince you they were right and I am not attempting to do so.
Why would either you or the court of appeal think there were more points of similarity than there were
The court did not count numbers of similarities. That was me identifying the things I could see in the judgement, mainly in response to people who thought there was only a single similarity. I am happy to conflate the two phrases used into a single point of similarity and, like you, I don't see how the court decided that she initiated sex with Evans unless they are referring to her requesting oral sex, which raises the question of whether they have given this one item more weight than they should given their other comment which also appears to relate to her alleged request for oral sex. However, the judgement only contains a summary of the evidence, not all of it. I really don't know whether or not they got it right. As I have not heard all the evidence and arguments or had a chance to see how the witnesses behave under questioning I clearly don't have as much information as the judges did. They are much better placed to decide than me but that does not mean they got it right. The Court of Appeal does make mistakes. Even if there is no clear mistake, it is entirely possible that a different set of judges faced with the same evidence would have come to a different decision. The judges comment about considerable hesitation suggests that they thought this was very finely balanced and the decision could have gone either way, hence my suspicion that it is the presumption of innocence that pushed it over the line.
calm down ladies and let clever lawyers worry about these things
Do you want me to list again the things I think are legitimate concerns? I am not saying that at all. If that is how you think my posts come across I can only apologise. You have every right to worry about things. I may try to explain why I don't share some of your concerns but that does not mean I don't think you have any right to worry or that you should leave it all to lawyers (God forbid!).
can't explain why this evidence is so singular
The judges did not describe the evidence as singular. They described the case as rare, not the new evidence.
Singular enough to overturn a jury verdict which had already had an appeal rejected
It does not need to be singular.
When assessing new evidence the process is the same regardless of the number of appeals. And the defendant is still entitled to the presumption of innocence regardless of the fact that they have been convicted and previous appeals have been rejected. Firstly, the court considers if the new evidence is admissible and was not available to the defence at the time of the original trial. On this question the court will tend to favour the defence on admissibility due to the presumption of innocence, although they have sometimes been known to come up with fairly bizarre arguments that evidence was available at the original trial when, on any reasonable construction of the facts, it clearly was not. Secondly, if they decide the new evidence is admissible, they consider whether it is enough to mean the jury's verdict is unsafe. If the prosecution is not going to push for a fresh trial the judges often tie themselves in knots to justify upholding the original verdict in the face of new evidence that most people would say undermines the verdict. However, where, as here, the prosecution has indicated it wants a fresh trial if the appeal is upheld, it gives the judges the option of simply throwing the whole thing back to a jury for them to decide rather than having to decide themselves. The mechanism for doing that is to quash the original verdict. So, in this case, my reading of the judgement is that the Court of Appeal decided that the evidence was admissible but only just, probably due to the presumption of innocence, then threw it back to a jury to decide whether or not the new evidence meant the conviction was unsafe.
I don't intend to contribute any more to this thread (although I am, in general, happy to respond to PMs). In parting I will say again that, whilst I don't share all of the concerns that have been expressed, I do believe that this case and the publicity surrounding it give valid cause for concern. I do share most of the concerns that have been expressed about the effect of this case on rape victims and future cases. There are many valid concerns.
We all need to be vigilant to ensure that the courts have the correct balance between protecting victims and the rights of the accused. Please campaign or do whatever you can to help. I would like to live in a world where every rape victim feels able to report the assault and every rapist ends up behind bars. It is unlikely to happen in my lifetime but that has to be the goal.
I apologise for the last paragraph being a bit preachy. I hope it isn't condescending or pompous. But, for personal reasons which I have not disclosed on this thread, I am passionate about getting justice for rape victims. I am conscious that the fact I am also passionate about the rights of the accused in all criminal cases leads me into contradictory positions. But that's enough from me.