Appeal against a rape conviction allowed after fresh evidence in the form of Facebook messages damaged the complainant's credibility.
[The complainant] deleted a total of 29 separate messages sent and received in February and March 2012 from the record. A comparison between the version of the messages in the exhibit before the jury and the full exchange reveals that the messages deleted were selective. In consequence, a number of significant and misleading impressions were given in the edited trial version.
Although there was a gap in Facebook messages they resumed on 19th March with the applicant asking [the complainant] for her phone number as his phone had deleted it. She immediately provided it ending her message with kisses. These messages were deleted from the version before the jury. Two days later, between 21st and 23rd March, there was another exchange of messages, whose edited version before the jury gave a very misleading context for his message "sorry", which was in fact in response to her asking him why he was ignoring her. Her response, again edited from the jury's version was "Dnt be". In its edited form before the jury, the context was capable of being construed as an apology for something that had happened between them.