In his 1935 judgment in Woolmington v DPP, Viscount Sankey declared the prosecution's burden of proving the accused's guilt was a ‘golden thread’, running ‘throughout the whole web of English criminal law’. This paper explores what Woolmington can tell us about the appeals process – and about the criminal law itself – less than 30 years after the first automatic right to appeal was created in English criminal law. It argues that the decision helps us understand the political pressures that could help to form – and make possible – legal decisions during this period. And it finds that the Woolmington decision itself – both in the text of the decision and in its immediate reception – was more universal than it was fundamental. Woolmington, I argue, has always been more about the high-level principles of English criminal law than about securing any kind of minimal procedural rights for a defendant.

This paper analyses the visualisation of rape and sexual assault in legal and scholarly language. It begins with a critique of the Court of Appeal ruling in R v. Evans (Chedwyn) and its forensic examination of the details of a female rape complainant's consensual sexual activity with other men. The case is analysed in light of a visual metaphor used by Ellison and Munro to describe the removal of popular misconceptions about rape. The paper contextualises that discussion with reference to the idea of the male gaze and its affirmation of a phallocentric cultural and social world in which the objectification of female difference is entrenched. The paper finally challenges that assessment, however, sketching an alternative approach to visual-critical scholarship that embraces interdisciplinarity and a literary sensibility to break (or at least to loosen) the association between the prurient eye of the male voyeur and the criminal justice gaze.