GDD v R; NJC v R [2010] NSWCCA 62

GDD v R; NJC v R [2010] NSWCCA 62

By majority, the cumulative effect of defects in the Crown Prosecutor's address, including unsupported factual assertions, invitations to speculate, misstatement of the Crown case on consent, and expressions of personal opinion, together with insufficient corrective directions by the trial judge, caused a miscarriage of justice. However, the evidence did not establish that the verdicts were unreasonable, because it remained open to the jury to be satisfied that LAC did not consent and that both applicants knew she was not consenting. The convictions were quashed and a new trial ordered.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeals Against Conviction; NJC Also Sought Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Alternative
Outcome
In each appeal, appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence quashed. New trial ordered.
Legal Topics
['aggravated Sexual Assault in Company' "crown Prosecutor's Address to Jury" 'miscarriage of Justice' 'jury Directions' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'new Trial']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['aggravated Sexual Assault in Company' "crown Prosecutor's Address to Jury" 'miscarriage of Justice' 'jury Directions' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'new Trial']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeals Against Conviction; NJC Also Sought Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Alternative

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the Crown Prosecutor's final address to the jury caused a miscarriage of justice." "Whether the trial judge erred in failing to discharge the jury at the close of the Crown Prosecutor's final address." 'Whether the trial judge failed to give appropriate directions to cure inappropriate and unfair comments by the Crown Prosecutor.' 'Whether the verdicts were unreasonable or could not be supported by the evidence.' "Whether it was necessary to address NJC's alternative sentence appeal."]

Ratio Decidendi

By majority, the cumulative effect of defects in the Crown Prosecutor's address, including unsupported factual assertions, invitations to speculate, misstatement of the Crown case on consent, and expressions of personal opinion, together with insufficient corrective directions by the trial judge, caused a miscarriage of justice. However, the evidence did not establish that the verdicts were unreasonable, because it remained open to the jury to be satisfied that LAC did not consent and that both applicants knew she was not consenting. The convictions were quashed and a new trial ordered.

Court Disposition

In each appeal, appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence quashed. New trial ordered.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed in each appeal.' 'Conviction and sentence quashed in each appeal.' 'New trial ordered.']