R v Young (a pseudonym) [2021] NSWDC 622

R v Young (a pseudonym) [2021] NSWDC 622

The proposed tendency evidence was admissible because s 97A of the Evidence Act 1995 applied and presumed significant probative value; the time gap, delays in reporting and generality of the allegations, individually or in combination, did not amount to exceptional circumstances permitting departure from that legislative direction. The similarities and circumstances of the allegations gave the evidence significant probative value, and any potential disadvantage or unfair prejudice to the accused could be ameliorated by appropriate judicial directions.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Proceedings Involving Child Sexual Offence Charges / Pre Trial Application to Exclude Proposed Tendency Evidence
Outcome
Application to exclude proposed tendency evidence is refused.
Legal Topics
['child Sexual Offences' 'tendency Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'section 97 a Evidence Act 1995']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['child Sexual Offences' 'tendency Evidence' 'admissibility of Evidence' 'probative Value' 'unfair Prejudice' 'section 97 a Evidence Act 1995']

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 Proceedings Involving Child Sexual Offence Charges / Pre Trial Application to Exclude Proposed Tendency Evidence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether proposed tendency evidence from each complainant was cross-admissible in relation to the counts concerning the other complainant and the counts relating to them individually.' 'Whether the proposed evidence had significant probative value under ss 97 and 101 of the Evidence Act 1995, having regard to s 97A.' 'Whether the accused established exceptional circumstances permitting the Court to take into account matters listed in s 97A(5), including delay, time gap and level of generality.' 'Whether the probative value of the proposed tendency evidence outweighed the danger of unfair prejudice to the accused.']

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed tendency evidence was admissible because s 97A of the Evidence Act 1995 applied and presumed significant probative value; the time gap, delays in reporting and generality of the allegations, individually or in combination, did not amount to exceptional circumstances permitting departure from that legislative direction. The similarities and circumstances of the allegations gave the evidence significant probative value, and any potential disadvantage or unfair prejudice to the accused could be ameliorated by appropriate judicial directions.

Court Disposition

Application to exclude proposed tendency evidence is refused.

Orders

  • ['Application to exclude proposed tendency evidence is refused.']