Georgia Faulke, Instructed by Gareth Price of Forbes Solicitors, Successful in No Case to Answer Submission in Bad Character Harassment Case

Harassment cases are inherently complex, particularly when considering the legal requirement for a “course of conduct” and the nuances of the complainant’s evidence.

In this case, the complainant did not establish a clear course of conduct. Specifically, he admitted that some of the contact was actually wanted. This admission undermined the continuity and intent required to prove harassment, as the law does not generally cover conduct that is consensual or welcomed by the alleged victim.

During cross-examination, Georgia Faulke adopted a strategy of focussing strictly on the facts that the complainant had already brought up in evidence. This involved not allowing the complainant to expand on or correct any deficiencies in his original testimony, thereby preventing him from strengthening his case after the fact.

The prosecutor did not address this gap in evidence during re-examination which left the complainant’s case as it stood, with the critical element of a continuous course of conduct unproven.

Based on these evidential shortcomings, a submission of no case to answer was made by Georgia Faulke on the basis that the complainant had not come up to proof on the essential elements of harassment. The submission was successful, despite bad character being previously admitted, resulting in a favourable outcome for the client.

For more information, or to instruct Georgia Faulke please contact Crime & Regulatory Clerk, George Hooley.