Man has conviction quashed after jury found him guilty of rape
Man, 22, has conviction quashed after jury found him guilty of raping a 13-year-old girl
A man who was sentenced to unpaid work after being convicted of raping a 13-year-old girl has had his conviction quashed.
Sean Hogg, 22, smirked as he left court after being told he would not be subject to a retrial following his acquittal.
He was convicted of raping the 13-year-old on various occasions in 2018, when he was aged 17. He was spared jail by Judge Lord Lake at the High Court in Glasgow in April and was instead given 270 hours of unpaid work, although he said if Hogg was over 25, he would have been sentenced to four or five years behind bars.
Under new court guidance in Scotland, criminals under the age of 25 are treated more leniently because of their alleged brain immaturity. At Hogg’s sentencing Lord Lake said that he had considered the guidelines.
Hogg claimed he was wrongfully convicted of the attacks in Dalkeith Park, Midlothian, and appealed. Judges at the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh have now quashed his conviction after prosecutors admitted ‘mistakes were made’ during his trial.
Sean Hogg, 22, smirked as he left court after being told he would not be subject to a retrial following his acquittal
Hogg was spared jail by Judge Lord Lake at the High Court in Glasgow in April and was instead given 270 hours of unpaid work – although the judge said if he was over 25, he would have been sentenced to four or five years behind bars
Judge Lady Dorrian said: ‘There was an insufficiency of evidence for conviction. ‘The appeal must succeed.’
Hogg’s lawyer, Donald Findlay, KC, told judges Lady Dorrian, Lord Matthews and Lord Pentland at the Court of Criminal Appeal that his client had been being wrongly convicted.
Mr Findlay said Lord Lake did not properly follow the correct legal procedures used in Scotland to establish the guilt of a rapist.
The defence lawyer told the court that the complainer whose evidence led to Hogg’s conviction had to have her account of being sexually assaulted corroborated.
Mr Findlay said Lord Lake told jurors in his legal directions that the complainer’s evidence could be corroborated by an account of a man who said that she appeared ‘distressed’ following the incident which led to Hogg’s conviction.
The lawyer told the court that it was wrong for Lord Lake to have told the jurors this.
He said the witness’s account of ‘distress’ could not corroborate the complainer’s account.
Mr Findlay said: ‘My submission is that the jury were misdirected by the trial judge and it pains me to say this but there has been a very significant miscarriage of justice at the hands of the judge.’
Sean Hogg (pictured) was placed on a community payback order earlier this year after he was convicted of raping a 13-year-old schoolgirl
Solicitor General Ruth Charteris KC said: ‘It is not in the public interest to seek a new prosecution.’
After the hearing, Ms Charteris added: ‘I know the complainer’s experience of the criminal justice system has been very difficult. I have offered to meet with her and her family if that would be helpful to them.
‘The Crown will seek to learn any lessons it can from this case as we continue work to transform the way we prosecute sexual offences.’
The Crown Office had planned to challenge the ‘unduly lenient’ sentence, if the appeal against conviction had not succeeded.
In a previous hearing, both the advocate depute and the trial judge were identified as having failed to push for more detail or issue adequate directions to the jury.
Donald Findlay KC, representing Hogg, told that hearing: ‘There has been a miscarriage of justice.’
Jurors heard at Hogg’s trial that he was 17 when he preyed on the 13-year-old schoolgirl, who cannot be named for legal reasons.
Court papers state that Hogg attacked her on various occasions between March and June 2018 and carried out an assault by threatening the teenager, seizing her by the wrists and raping the youngster.
Hogg’s lawyer, Donald Findlay, KC, told judges Lady Dorrian, Lord Matthews and Lord Pentland at the Court of Criminal Appeal that his client had been being wrongly convicted
As well as being ordered to carry out unpaid work, Hogg was put under supervision and placed on the sex offenders’ register for three years.
On sentencing Hogg, Lord Lake said: ‘Rape is one of the most serious crimes and that is why it is tried at the High Court.
‘Looking at the circumstances, her age and vulnerabilities are aggravating factors. For the level of seriousness, I have to consider your liability and have regard to your age as a factor.
‘This offence, if committed by an adult over 25, you attract a sentence of four or five years.
‘I don’t consider that appropriate and don’t intend to send you to prison. You are a first offender with no previous history of prison; you are 21 and were 17 at the time. Prison does not lead me to believe this will contribute to your rehabilitation.’
Prosecutor Ruth Charteris, KC, told the court the Crown believed that there was enough evidence to allow it to maintain Hogg’s conviction. If the appeal judges rule against Hogg, then the Crown will make submissions to the court about his sentence being unduly lenient.
Lady Dorrian said: ‘We will take our time to consider the issues in this case and we will issue our decision in writing in due course.’
Speaking after the case, the complainer’s lawyer Aamer Anwar said: ‘My client in April of this year was left devastated. As far as she is concerned, she came forward. She told the truth. She spoke up. She believes the police and the jury did its duty.
‘There is much more that she wishes to say but it would be inappropriate to comment further until the Appeal Court issues its judgment.’
Source: Read Full Article