R v Allan Cameron [2020] NSWDC 444

R v Allan Cameron [2020] NSWDC 444

The Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt all elements of Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18 and 19. The complainants whose counts were proved were assessed as genuine and reliable, their accounts were supported in various respects by complaint evidence, photographs, inconsistencies or implausibilities in the accused's evidence, and, where applicable, tendency and coincidence evidence. The evidence did not prove required elements of Counts 8, 10, 15, 16, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25 and 26 beyond reasonable doubt, including because of deficiencies as to intention, uncertainty or conflict about the alleged act, or failure to prove non-consent or knowledge of non-consent.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 May 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Judge Alone Trial / Verdict After Trial on Indictment
Outcome
Guilty of Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18 and 19; not guilty of Counts 8, 10, 15, 16, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25 and 26. Counts 6 and 22 had resulted in not guilty findings at the close of the Crown case.
Legal Topics
['indecent Assault' 'sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'procure for Prostitution' 'tendency Evidence' 'coincidence Evidence' 'consent' 'complaint Evidence' 'judge Alone Trial']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['indecent Assault' 'sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'procure for Prostitution' 'tendency Evidence' 'coincidence Evidence' 'consent' 'complaint Evidence' 'judge Alone 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 Judge Alone Trial / Verdict After Trial on Indictment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the alleged indecent assaults and sexual offences against multiple complainants during photo shoots.' 'Whether the Crown proved the elements of procuring a person, not being a prostitute, for purposes of prostitution.' 'Whether tendency evidence and coincidence evidence could be used to prove that the accused committed particular alleged acts.' "Whether non-consent and the accused's knowledge of non-consent were proved beyond reasonable doubt on particular counts."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt all elements of Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18 and 19. The complainants whose counts were proved were assessed as genuine and reliable, their accounts were supported in various respects by complaint evidence, photographs, inconsistencies or implausibilities in the accused's evidence, and, where applicable, tendency and coincidence evidence. The evidence did not prove required elements of Counts 8, 10, 15, 16, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25 and 26 beyond reasonable doubt, including because of deficiencies as to intention, uncertainty or conflict about the alleged act, or failure to prove non-consent or knowledge of non-consent.

Court Disposition

Guilty of Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 18 and 19; not guilty of Counts 8, 10, 15, 16, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25 and 26. Counts 6 and 22 had resulted in not guilty findings at the close of the Crown case.

Orders

  • ['Count 1: Guilty' 'Count 2: Guilty' 'Count 3: Guilty' 'Count 4: Guilty' 'Count 5: Guilty' 'Count 7: Guilty' 'Count 8: Not Guilty' 'Count 9: Guilty' 'Count 10: Not Guilty' 'Count 11: Guilty' 'Count 12: Guilty' 'Count 13: Guilty' 'Count 14: Guilty' 'Count 15: Not Guilty' 'Count 16: Not Guilty' 'Count 17: Guilty'...