Janick Fielding secured unanimous acquittals for a man charged with multiple rapes of a previous partner

R v RB:

Janick Fielding secured unanimous acquittals for a man charged with multiple rapes of a previous partner, the mother of his child, in an incident alleged to have occurred in January 2020.

RB was said to have attended her address in the early hours of the morning with a bottle of prosecco, only to become enraged when she demanded he do more for their son. He was said to have pinned her to the bed, committing multiple serious sexual offences, before smashing her property with a hammer.

The defence case was very different. RB could only say he was bemused by the allegations, having had consensual intercourse before leaving when she demanded he resume their long-finished relationship.

Body-worn camera footage reflected her intoxicated state on making the initial complaint the following morning, whilst also claiming to be lost only a few hundred feet from her home address. In her interview, when sober two days later, she was to disclose that she had wanted him not just to assist her in securing the return of their son from social services, but also two more of the nine children previously removed from her.

Janick’s cross-examination in the first trial, in 2023, established that she had become distressed when he had outright rejected her plan. Of greater significance, Janick’s searching questions, coupled with his continued pressure for more disclosure, not only resulted in the revelation that her first account at the roadside was four times longer, but that the police had cut the footage immediately before the complainant disclosed a motive for fabrication and had also revealed that she was suffering from acute symptoms arising from a failure to take medication for longstanding mental health conditions. The trial was aborted for the defence to obtain expert assessments.

Janick having advised on the instruction of a forensic toxicologist, biomedical scientist and consultant psychiatrist, the defence were able to establish that key elements of her account were variously a fiction or may have been subject to acute confusion and possible confabulation, particularly when her condition was exacerbated by cocaine and alcohol abuse. The response of the CPS was to claim that the reports were irrelevant because the complainant latterly asserted she had no such mental health condition and was not on medication, despite her having said it repeatedly to those she made complaint.

Despite the complainant dying in 2024, and the court permitting the prosecution to proceed without the defence being able to cross-examine on the material previously withheld, no retrial was possible until 2026. During extensive cross-examination of the investigating officer, Janick established evidence of multiple significant failings and incompetence in relation to the seizure of exhibits, taking of accounts and preservation of evidence. Janick also established that the failure to conduct a proper investigation stemmed from the lead officer’s unsupported preference for the complainant’s account. The most damage was caused, however, when Janick had the officer concede that despite six years to investigate, there was, save for the complainant’s account, not a shred of evidence that undermined anything the defendant, a man of hitherto good character, had said in interview. The acquittals arrived swiftly.

– Croydon Crown Court, instructed by Richard Brown of Baxter Brown McArthur.