STEPHEN CASEY'S FAILED BID TO CLEAR HIS NAME IN LEIGH SEX OFFENSES CASE

In July 2014, a significant legal setback was faced by Stephen Casey, a man from Leigh, who sought to overturn his convictions related to serious sexual offenses. Casey, aged 46 at the time, was convicted of multiple counts of indecent assault and rape involving a young girl, with the incidents occurring during his thirties. His case was heard at Liverpool Crown Court in October 2008, where he was sentenced to nine years in prison after being found guilty of five counts of indecent assault and one count of rape.

Despite the gravity of his crimes, Casey attempted to challenge his convictions at London's Appeal Court. However, his appeal was ultimately dismissed by a panel of three senior judges, who concluded that there was no reasonable basis to believe he had been denied a fair trial. Mr. Justice Hamblen, presiding over the case, stated that Casey had repeatedly engaged in inappropriate and sexual touching of his victim before ultimately having sexual intercourse with her during the offenses, which took place years earlier.

The victim, whose identity remains protected for legal reasons, kept her ordeal to herself for many years. It was only after she confided in her friends that her mother was informed, leading to police involvement. Casey was arrested in April 2008, shortly after the police were alerted. Throughout the proceedings, Casey maintained his innocence, denying any wrongdoing.

It was noted that Casey had prior convictions for dishonesty, driving offenses, theft, and obstructing police, but these did not include sexual offenses. Nevertheless, the jury, after careful consideration, convicted him of the sex crimes by majority verdicts.

In his appeal, Casey's legal representative, David Emanuel, argued that the trial judge had failed to adequately instruct the jury on the evidence and on Casey’s lack of previous sexual offense convictions, which he claimed prejudiced his client’s defense. However, the appellate judges, including Mr. Justice Hamblen, Lord Justice Davis, and Judge Martyn Zeidman QC, disagreed with this assertion. They stated, “We are not satisfied that these convictions are arguably unsafe.”

Furthermore, the court highlighted that Casey’s appeal was filed more than five years after the original sentencing—specifically, five years and four months later—and that an application for an extension of time, made without a valid reason, was rejected. The judges emphasized the importance of timely appeals and upheld the original convictions, reinforcing the severity of the crimes committed in Leigh.