ALS v R [2013] NSWCCA 63

ALS v R [2013] NSWCCA 63

The admission of video evidence from the complainant’s half-sister’s 1995 wedding, showing gestures by the complainant towards the accused, created a significant possibility that a reasonable trier of fact would have entertained a doubt as to the applicant’s guilt. The interests of justice warranted a new trial, not an acquittal, as the prosecution case remained substantially based on the credibility of the complainant and the fresh evidence had not been fully tested.

Parties
Applicant: ALS; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction After Judge Alone District Court Trial
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Conviction quashed. New trial ordered.
Legal Topics
Carnal Knowledge of Child, Fresh Evidence, Unreasonable Verdict, Credit of Witnesses, New Trial or Acquittal
Criminal Law Carnal Knowledge of Child Fresh Evidence Unreasonable Verdict Credit of Witnesses New Trial or Acquittal

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 3 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ALS

Applicant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Conviction After Judge Alone District Court Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether adverse credit findings by trial judge in a prior trial caused unfairness in second trial
  2. 2 Whether admission of fresh evidence creates a significant possibility the applicant would have been acquitted
  3. 3 Whether the verdict was unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The admission of video evidence from the complainant’s half-sister’s 1995 wedding, showing gestures by the complainant towards the accused, created a significant possibility that a reasonable trier of fact would have entertained a doubt as to the applicant’s guilt. The interests of justice warranted a new trial, not an acquittal, as the prosecution case remained substantially based on the credibility of the complainant and the fresh evidence had not been fully tested.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Conviction quashed. New trial ordered.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted
  • Appeal allowed