R v Wran (a pseudonym) [2021] NSWDC 185

R v Wran (a pseudonym) [2021] NSWDC 185

Section 80G of the Crimes Act 1900 requires the incitement of another person who is capable in law of committing the sexual offence allegedly incited. The only person said to have been incited was the child complainant and intended victim of the alleged s 66C offence, who was legally incapable of committing that offence. The evidence, even taken at its highest, therefore could not support a conviction on count 5, and the defence was entitled to a directed verdict.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Procedure Ruling in a Trial Concerning Sexual Offences / Defence Application for a Directed Verdict on Count 5
Outcome
Defence entitled to a directed verdict on count 5.
Legal Topics
['directed Verdict' 'incitement' 'sexual Offences' 'statutory Interpretation' 'legal Impossibility']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['directed Verdict' 'incitement' 'sexual Offences' 'statutory Interpretation' 'legal Impossibility']

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 Procedure Ruling in a Trial Concerning Sexual Offences / Defence Application for a Directed Verdict on Count 5

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether s 80G of the Crimes Act 1900 requires incitement of another person capable in law of committing the sexual offence alleged to have been incited.' 'Whether the complainant, as the intended victim and a child, was legally capable of committing the s 66C offence alleged to have been incited.' 'Whether the evidence, taken at its highest, could permit a verdict of guilty on count 5.']

Ratio Decidendi

Section 80G of the Crimes Act 1900 requires the incitement of another person who is capable in law of committing the sexual offence allegedly incited. The only person said to have been incited was the child complainant and intended victim of the alleged s 66C offence, who was legally incapable of committing that offence. The evidence, even taken at its highest, therefore could not support a conviction on count 5, and the defence was entitled to a directed verdict.

Court Disposition

Defence entitled to a directed verdict on count 5.

Orders

  • ['The defence is entitled to a directed verdict on count 5.']