Facts of the Morgan case

Press, 26 August 1980, Page 16

Facts of the Morgan case

By

H. J. EVANS,

a retired Christchurch

Magistrate.

Under the heading “Legislation on Rape” you printed on August 21 and 22 letters from 10 angry people. Their target was Douglas McKenzie’s article (August 19) and the law itself. In fairness to my erstwhile profession may I say. that, on the facts of Morgan’s Case, the article was seriously deficient. What were the facts? '

The four men were tried by Judge and jury and found guilty, three being convicted of. rape upon Mrs Morgan, and Morgan of aiding and abetting the other three. The}’ were sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment.

They appealed, on the ground that the Judge had misdirected the jury on the law. The Court of Appeal (the Lord Chief Justice and two other Judges) unanimously held there had been no misdirection. They gave their reasons at length, and confirmed all convictions. Finally the defendants appealed to the House of Lords (five Judges), again on the ground of misdirection. Argument lasted five days. Three months later judgments were delivered, each dealing at length with the legal principles applicable, especially in relation to “consent.” Three Judges con*

sidered that “when a man has had sexual intercourse with a woman without her consent, but genuinely believing nevertheless that she did consent, he is not to be convicted of rape, even if the jury is satisfied that he had no reasonable grounds for so believing.” They held that, the trial Judge having failed to direct the thus, he had them.

The other two Judges, dissenting from the principle as so stated, found no misdirection. All five, however, were unanimous in dismissing the appeals and in upholding the convictions. They did so because, in their opinion, “it was clear the jury rejected the men’s allegations of Mrs Morgan’s cooperation, a version diametrically opposed to hers, and would not have returned a different verdict even if they had been properly directed by the Judge.” In the result, the four defendants were disbelieved from start to finish of the case, their convictions for rape being supported by the combined opinions of a jury of twelve and nine Judges. I hope that those of your correspondents who have characterised the Morgan Case as “a rapist’s charter” will be willing to reconsider their verdict.