HMA v Basharat Khan 2020Mr Khan has had his bid to appeal against his conviction refused at the High Court. The appellant argued that the judge presented a misdirection to the jury which caused him to be wrongly convicted of the offence of rape.
This alleged misdirection was in relation to the adoption of prior statements of witnesses. The appellant stood trial for rape along with a co accused at the High Court in Edinburgh. The appellant was found guilty and sentenced to six years imprisonment in July 2017. The co-accused, a friend of the appellant’s, was acquitted of the rape charge against him. The defence team for the appellant argued at Appeal that the trial judge did not direct the jury property in relation to prior statements. The appellant argued that the female complainer and another crown witness, a male who said he was in the room while the offence took place, did not adopt their prior statements and the judge should have made it clear whether statements had been adopted or not. The argument in essence was what the judge had stated was not legally correct in his charge. The appeal court did agree that what the trial judge had said in relation to adopting prior statements was incorrect and in fact his was also accepted by the crown.