R v DX [2011] NSWDC 98

R v DX [2011] NSWDC 98

The Court found CY and SZ to be impressive, articulate and clear witnesses whose evidence was not materially damaged in cross-examination. The collateral matters raised by the defence did not undermine reliability on the central allegations. DX's evidence on the specific disputed issues was rejected as completely unreliable because of inconsistencies between his statements and his current account, acknowledgments that the complainants' assertions could be true, his faded memory, and his acknowledgment of possible self-deception. There was no reasonable possibility that his recollection on the specific accounts could be true, so the Court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Disputed Facts Ruling on Sentence Hearing
Outcome
The Court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accounts given by CY and SZ were true.
Legal Topics
['disputed Facts on Sentence' 'indecent Exposure' 'child Sexual Offences' 'tendency Regarding Uncharged Acts' 'witness Credibility and Reliability']
['criminal Law'] ['disputed Facts on Sentence' 'indecent Exposure' 'child Sexual Offences' 'tendency Regarding Uncharged Acts' 'witness Credibility and Reliability']

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 / Disputed Facts Ruling on Sentence Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether to take into account tendency regarding uncharged acts in resolving disputed facts on sentence.' "Whether the offender deliberately inserted his penis into CY's mouth during the car incident." 'Whether the offender masturbated in the presence of CY and SZ during the indecent exposure offences.' "Whether the accounts of CY and SZ should be accepted beyond reasonable doubt despite the offender's different recollection."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found CY and SZ to be impressive, articulate and clear witnesses whose evidence was not materially damaged in cross-examination. The collateral matters raised by the defence did not undermine reliability on the central allegations. DX's evidence on the specific disputed issues was rejected as completely unreliable because of inconsistencies between his statements and his current account, acknowledgments that the complainants' assertions could be true, his faded memory, and his acknowledgment of possible self-deception. There was no reasonable possibility that his recollection on the specific accounts could be true, so the Court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the...

Court Disposition

The Court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accounts given by CY and SZ were true.

Orders

  • []