Ex-teacher aims to quash teen sex assault conviction

Wednesday 24 July 2019

An ex-teacher jailed for sexually abusing two teenage girls is seeking to overturn his conviction, arguing that his trial was prejudiced by unsubstantiated allegations of other assaults being admitted as “evidence”.

Ian David Priestley (66), who previously worked at Les Quennevais and Le Rocquier Schools, was jailed for five years after a three-day trial in January this year. He had denied two assaults on teenage girls in the 1990s and 2000s.

Ahead of the trial, both assault victims had provided statements to the Police, which were said to place the offences against them in context. 

However, representing Mr Priestley in the Court of Appeal this week, Advocate Ian Jones argued that it was unfair that allegations within them, which had not been proven and were not directly related to the charges against his client, were used as so-called ‘background evidence’. 

Pictured: Mr Priestley, a former teacher at Les Quennevais and Le Rocquier, was jailed for five years.

“The ‘background evidence’ was nothing of the sort. It did not meet the relevant test to be admitted,” Advocate Jones said, “In this case, ‘background’ seems to be a label used as a vehicle to admit, or rely upon, inadmissible evidence.”

The Defence Advocate told the Court that, background evidence had to be necessary to a case in the sense that the jury’s understanding would be incomplete or the case incomprehensible or incoherent without it. Here, he said, the Royal Court had allowed evidence of alleged behaviour committed by his client with the girls to be admitted merely because it was helpful to their case.

In an exchange with Court of Appeal judge Clare Montgomery QC, Advocate Jones went on to argue that, even if the evidence could properly be regarded as ‘background’ in the legal sense, the prejudice to his client meant that it should nevertheless have been excluded. 

Describing the situation as “extremely prejudicial”, he later pointed out that one of the accusations of misconduct against Mr Priestley was more serious than the offences with which he was ultimately charged.

Seeking to set aside Mr Priestley’s convictions, Advocate Jones also argued that, if the Appeal Court disagreed with his submissions, the five-year prison sentence should be reduced because it was manifestly excessive in relation to similar cases, and to sentencing guidelines used in England and Wales.

Video: Mr Priestley leaving court following his sentencing.

Advocate Jones noted that, although the Royal Court was developing a “new landscape” of higher sentences for sexual crimes, his client appeared to have been given a far longer sentence than was appropriate.

On behalf of the Attorney General, Crown Advocate Julian Gollop asked the Court to reject the appeal.

He said that Royal Court Commissioner, Sir Michael Birt, who presided over the trial was an experienced judge, who applied the appropriate test when considering whether the background evidence should be introduced. 

He also argued that the disputed evidence itself was highly relevant. 

Pictured: Advocate Jones said that allegations in the victims' Police statements should not have been considered as background evidence.

“The jury would otherwise have been left to speculate on how a married man came to be in that position,” Advocate Gollop said, explaining that the evidence provided “stepping stones” to the crimes. 

He added that the Commissioner at the time had made it clear to the jury that the evidence was contested.

In relation to the appeal for a shortened sentence, the Crown Advocate argued that the Court had found no assistance in previous cases, nor from guidelines in other jurisdictions.

Ultimately, he argued that the sentence could not reasonably be regarded as excessive, and that it would be inappropriate for the Court of Appeal to change it.  

Appeal Court President Mr James McNeil QC, sitting with Miss Clare Montgomery QC and the Bailiff of Guernsey, Sir Richard Collas, reserved judgment, which is expected to be delivered today.