The Tribune

By LYNAIRE MUNNINGS

Tribune Staff Reporter

lmunnings@tribunemedia.net

THE Court of Appeal has upheld the 27-year prison sentence of a man convicted of seven counts of incest involving his biological daughter, after finding that his trial was fair and that the sentence was appropriate.

The appellant, identified in the judgment as O.G., appealed his convictions and sentence, arguing that several issues during his trial affected the fairness of the proceedings. He claimed the trial judge wrongly restricted the defence’s questions to the complainant, allowed an improper audio recording into evidence, continued the trial without a defence witness who was hospitalised, and should not have overseen the case after a previous trial had ended without a verdict.

However, the Court of Appeal rejected those arguments and dismissed the appeal. O.G. was convicted on November 13, 2023, of seven counts of incest under the Sexual Offences Act. The offences were alleged to have occurred between February 1, 2015 and October 27, 2020, involving his daughter, who was 16 years old when the first offence was alleged to have occurred.

He was sentenced on March 19, 2024, to 27 years in prison for the first count and eight years for each of the other six counts. The sentences were ordered to run at the same time.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge acted correctly when allowing the complainant’s sister to give evidence about a disclosure of abuse. The court said the evidence was not used to prove the allegations were true, but to show that the complainant’s actions were consistent with her account of what happened.

The court also ruled that the defence was properly prevented from questioning the complainant about an alleged sexual relationship with another person, finding that the information was not relevant to whether O.G. committed the offences.

The judges said the defence was still able to challenge the complainant’s credibility and argue that the allegations were false. The Court also found that an audio recording used during the trial was properly admitted because it was relevant to the case and there was no evidence that it had been changed or tampered with.

The recording was considered important because it helped the jury assess allegations that O.G. used threats and intimidation against the complainant. The appeal court further ruled that O.G.’s rights were not violated when a defence witness could not testify because he was hospitalised.

The court said there was no clear timeline for when the witness would have recovered and noted that the defence had not applied for other options, such as allowing the witness to testify by video link. The judges also rejected O.G.’s argument that the trial judge should not have heard the case because she had previously handled an earlier trial that ended before a verdict was reached.

It was said there was no evidence that the judge was biased or unable to fairly consider the case. In upholding the sentence, the Court said incest involving a minor is a serious offence, particularly because it involves a breach of trust between a parent and child.

The judges noted that the abuse was alleged to have occurred over several years, in the family home, which should have been a place where the victim felt safe and protected.

Although O.G. had no previous convictions, the court said that factor was outweighed by the seriousness of the offences. The court concluded that the trial judge followed the correct legal process, that O.G. received a fair trial, and that the sentence was lawful.