R v Suh [2014] NSWDC 233

R v Suh [2014] NSWDC 233

Professor Hayes is relevantly qualified to express opinions about sexualised behaviour consistent with sexual experience from sexual touching. Her general opinion evidence is admissible regarding what sexualised behaviour is and whether such behaviour is consistent with possible sexual assault. Specific opinions directly relating to the complainant are excluded under s 137 due to risk of prejudice, per caution in MA, but general evidence is admitted as relevant to credibility under s 79 and 108C. Leave to admit is granted.

Parties
Prosecutor: Director of Public Prosecutions; Accused: Jung Shik Suh
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Application on Evidence Admissibility
Outcome
Opinion evidence of Professor Hayes admitted (general), specific opinion as to complainant excluded.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Opinion Evidence, Expert Evidence, Credibility Evidence, Specialised Knowledge, Relevance, Probative Value Vs Prejudice
Criminal Law Evidence Law Admissibility of Opinion Evidence Expert Evidence Credibility Evidence Specialised Knowledge Relevance Probative Value Vs Prejudice

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Director of Public Prosecutions

Prosecutor

Jung Shik Suh

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Interlocutory Application on Evidence Admissibility

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does Professor Hayes have specialised knowledge under s 79 Evidence Act 1995 to express opinions on child sexualised behaviour?
  2. 2 Is the opinion evidence relevant and admissible?
  3. 3 Could the evidence substantially affect the assessment of the complainant's credibility (s 108C Evidence Act)?

Ratio Decidendi

Professor Hayes is relevantly qualified to express opinions about sexualised behaviour consistent with sexual experience from sexual touching. Her general opinion evidence is admissible regarding what sexualised behaviour is and whether such behaviour is consistent with possible sexual assault. Specific opinions directly relating to the complainant are excluded under s 137 due to risk of prejudice, per caution in MA, but general evidence is admitted as relevant to credibility under s 79 and 108C. Leave to admit is granted.

Court Disposition

Opinion evidence of Professor Hayes admitted (general), specific opinion as to complainant excluded.

Orders

  • Leave granted to admit opinion evidence of Professor Hayes regarding general sexualised behaviour as consistent with possible sexual assault.
  • Leave to admit specific opinion as to the complainant's behaviour excluded under s 137 Evidence Act 1995.