R v Apicella

Facts

Apicella was charged with three rapes. Each complainant had contracted an unusual strain of gonorrhoea. While he was on remand a prison doctor, suspecting the same infection, had a consultant take a sample. Apicella submitted because a prison officer told him he had no choice. The sample showed the same strain. He said it had been taken without real consent and should be excluded as unfair.

Issue

Is a body sample taken without true consent inadmissible?

Held

No. The Court of Appeal held that the use of the sample was not unfair. It was relevant, and the lack of consent did not require the judge to exclude it.

Principle

Absence of consent to a procedure is a reason to look at fairness. It is not an automatic exclusion. On these facts the evidence stood.

Why it matters

It is an application of Kuruma, not an exception. Payne is the exception.

For study only. By lanbuk.com. Always check current sources and consult a qualified professional.