BQ v The King [2024] HCA 29

BQ v The King [2024] HCA 29

All of the expert evidence of Associate Professor Shackel adduced at trial concerned possible responses of victims of child sexual assault and was within her accepted area of expertise; there was no need to direct the jury that her evidence said nothing about the complainants' credibility. There was no appreciable risk that the jury would use her evidence illegitimately so as to warrant giving any particular direction; the appeal was therefore dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: BQ; Respondent: The King
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Special Leave Appeal From the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal to the High Court of Australia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Expert Evidence, Opinion Evidence, Credibility Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, Jury Directions, Sexual Offences Against Children
Evidence Criminal Law Expert Evidence Opinion Evidence Credibility Evidence Admissibility of Evidence Jury Directions Sexual Offences Against Children

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 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BQ

Appellant

The King

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Special Leave Appeal From the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal to the High Court of Australia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether portions of the expert evidence adduced by the prosecution went beyond the accepted area of expertise and were therefore inadmissible
  2. 2 Whether a miscarriage of justice arose from the failure to give general and particular directions to the jury to limit the use of expert evidence concerning child sexual abuse

Ratio Decidendi

All of the expert evidence of Associate Professor Shackel adduced at trial concerned possible responses of victims of child sexual assault and was within her accepted area of expertise; there was no need to direct the jury that her evidence said nothing about the complainants' credibility. There was no appreciable risk that the jury would use her evidence illegitimately so as to warrant giving any particular direction; the appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.