trt - //Going back to the case, why weren't the two men, who said they had sexual intercourse with the girl, before and after the rape, called as witnesses in the first trial, or was there a bit of skulduggery going on? //
There is legislation designed to protect alleged victims in rape cases that means that their previous sexual history cannot be divulged in court because it may prejudice the perceptions of the jury about the evidence, and thus taint the verdict.
In exceptional circumstances, the defence can appeal that the sexual history of the alleged victim is pertinent.
The request to hear that history is put before a body of Appeal Court judges and if they decide that it is in the interests of a fair trial that such evidence is heard, then it is admitted.
It may be that the defence were unable to get that ruling for the first trial, but they did get it for the second trial.
That is why evidence about the alleged victim's sexual behaviour was used as evidence, which in turn allowed Evans acquittal.