R v Johnson (No 2) [2020] NSWDC 413

R v Johnson (No 2) [2020] NSWDC 413

The Crown failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The judge was not satisfied that the complainant was intoxicated to the extent she claimed, found the complaint evidence and distress equivocal, identified significant reliability and credibility concerns in the complainant's evidence, and accepted that the accused's account of consensual intercourse remained a reasonably possible version of events. Accordingly the Crown failed to eliminate a reasonable possibility that the defence version was true.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Prosecution for Sexual Intercourse Without Consent Contrary to S 61 a of the Crimes Act 1900 / Judge Alone Trial After Plea of Not Guilty; Verdict
Outcome
Accused found not guilty; acquittal entered on the record.
Legal Topics
['sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'consent' 'knowledge of Non Consent' 'recklessness' 'intoxication' 'judge Alone Trial' 'burden of Proof' 'good Character Evidence' 'complaint Evidence' 'witness Credibility']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'consent' 'knowledge of Non Consent' 'recklessness' 'intoxication' 'judge Alone Trial' 'burden of Proof' 'good Character Evidence' 'complaint Evidence' 'witness Credibility']

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 Prosecution for Sexual Intercourse Without Consent Contrary to S 61 a of the Crimes Act 1900 / Judge Alone Trial After Plea of Not Guilty; Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had sexual intercourse with BH without her consent.' 'Whether the Crown proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused knew BH did not consent, was reckless as to consent, or had no reasonable grounds for believing she consented.' 'Whether the complainant was substantially intoxicated or asleep at the relevant time.' "Whether the complainant's complaint evidence, demeanour, and account were reliable." "Whether the accused's evidence was a reasonably possible version of events."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The judge was not satisfied that the complainant was intoxicated to the extent she claimed, found the complaint evidence and distress equivocal, identified significant reliability and credibility concerns in the complainant's evidence, and accepted that the accused's account of consensual intercourse remained a reasonably possible version of events. Accordingly the Crown failed to eliminate a reasonable possibility that the defence version was true.

Court Disposition

Accused found not guilty; acquittal entered on the record.

Orders

  • ['The accused is found not guilty.' 'An acquittal will be entered on the record.']