View source for C v R (2012) EWCA Crim 2034, (2012) MHLO 104

''The appellant appealed against his convictions for sexual offences on the basis that there had been no sexual relationship with the complainant (his step-daughter) before she was 16 years of age, and that thereafter the sexual relationship had been consensual. There was a substantial body of evidence which showed apparent consent to sexual activity after the complainant was 16 years old. But once the jury were satisfied that sexual activity had occurred when the complainant was a child, and that it impacted on and reflected the appellant's dominance and control over the complainant, it was open to them to conclude that the evidence of apparent consent when the complainant was no longer a child was indeed apparent, not real, and that the appellant was well aware that in reality she was not consenting.''

==Other==
Hearing: 25/7/12

Decision: 09/10/12

Before: Lord Judge LCJ; Mackay and Dobbs JJ

J Samuels QC for the Appellant

I Simkin for the Respondent

==External link==
{{#bailii:(2012) EWCA Crim 2034}}

[[Category:Criminal law capacity cases‎]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2012 cases]]