RL, R v

[2] The prosecution case was that the applicant sexually assaulted three girls on 28 and 29 May 2009; MM, then aged 12 (count 1), SD, then aged 14 (count 2) and NG, then aged 13 (counts 3 and 4).

[7] NG said that she did not know either MM or SD. They went to different schools. MM and SD attended the same school but they were not friends and were not in the same year group. MM said, however, that she knew NG. It was pointed out to the jury that neither MM nor SD picked the applicant out at a police identification procedure.

[9] The applicant stated that shortly afterwards Mr G and NG arrived at his home. He stated that Mr G accused him of touching his daughter's leg. The Judge noted that Mr G said he made it clear that the allegation was about touching his daughter's body. The applicant's mother said that NG also said that it was her leg that was touched. The Judge noted the applicant attended the police station voluntarily and that he maintained his innocence throughout police interviews.

[11] Article 17(2) of the Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) Order 2004 deals with the issue of cross admissibility in a multi count indictment.

The effect of this is that an application to introduce bad character evidence arising from the evidence on any other count must be made if it is to be admitted. This is acknowledged in R v Chopra [2006] EWCA Crim 2133 . The applicant objected to the prosecution case being reopened for that purpose. The applicant had made the application for a direction but no evidence had yet been called on the applicant's behalf.