Court of Appeal dismisses Jason John Ellis's appeal against conviction

Court of Appeal Dismisses Jason John Ellis's Appeal Against Conviction

The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by Jason John Ellis, who was convicted of multiple sexual offences, including three counts of rape, one count of assault by penetration, and one count of sexual assault. The appeal was heard by Lord Justice Lewis, Mr Justice Andrew Baker, and Mrs Justice Yip DBE.

The original conviction took place on 5 September 2022 at the Crown Court at Chester, where Ellis was sentenced to 16 years' imprisonment. The case involved serious allegations of sexual offences against a victim with whom Ellis had been in a relationship. The victim reported the offences to the police in August 2020, leading to Ellis's arrest and subsequent trial.

Ellis sought leave to appeal against his conviction, requiring an extension of time to do so. However, the single judge refused his application after considering the merits of the proposed grounds of appeal. Ellis then attempted to renew his application to the full court, seeking to amend his grounds of appeal and introduce fresh evidence. He also applied for bail.

The appeal court reviewed the evidence presented at trial, which included the victim's testimony, forensic evidence, and messages from mobile phones. The victim's account was supported by evidence of injuries and a recorded message from Ellis admitting to potentially being a 'controlling rapist'. The jury at the original trial found the victim's testimony credible and consistent with the evidence presented.

Ellis's appeal was based on claims that his trial counsel was unfit, evidence was not properly presented, and key witnesses were not called. The court found no merit in these claims, noting that trial counsel's response was thorough and considered. The single judge's reasoning in rejecting the initial grounds was upheld by the full court.

Ellis attempted to introduce new evidence and arguments that had been addressed at trial. However, the court found no basis for admitting this fresh evidence, as it did not meet the criteria set out in section 23 of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968. The proposed new evidence was deemed insufficient to affect the safety of the convictions.

The court also addressed complaints about disclosure, finding no evidence of any material being improperly withheld. The trial process was deemed fair, with the jury's verdict reflecting the strength of the evidence against Ellis.

Ultimately, the Court of Appeal concluded that there were no arguable grounds for the appeal and refused all applications related to the conviction. The decision to uphold the original conviction and sentence underscores the court's confidence in the trial process and the evidence presented.

Copyright & permissions