The appellant was arrested on attempting to leave the country using false documentation. 

The custody record indicated that although the appellant insisted she was older, she appeared to be a juvenile, and subsequently informed her solicitors she was 17 years of age. Further, she claimed that she had been a victim of sex-trafficking, which was documented in writing by an outreach worker in counsel’s brief.

At the Crown Court she pleaded guilty with neither the discrepancies about her age, or trafficking claims being explored further. Upon appeal to the Court of Appeal, it was held that there was a complete absence of a fair trial.

The failures by both the Crown, in investigating the apparent youth of the appellant, and defence counsel, in failing to raise the issue of the trafficking as a possible defence of duress, were shameful and the conviction was quashed.