R v DBG [2002] NSWCCA 328

R v DBG [2002] NSWCCA 328

The appeal was allowed because the trial judge's summing up failed to direct the jury about the prejudice caused by significant delay in complaint, particularly the appellant's impaired ability to defend and test the Crown case, and because the directions concerning the complainant's October 2000 statements blurred the distinction between prior consistent statement evidence admitted under s 108(3) and recent complaint evidence, thereby giving the jury an erroneous impression that delayed complaint could bolster the complainant's credibility. Those errors created the possibility of a miscarriage of justice, although the Court was not persuaded that the verdicts were unsupported by the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 September 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Convictions and Sentences for Sexual Intercourse Offences / Appeal From District Court Jury Convictions and Sentences to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; convictions and sentences quashed; new trial ordered.
Legal Topics
['sexual Offences Against a Child' 'delay in Complaint' 'longman Warning' 'evidence of Children by Recording and Closed Circuit Television' 'prior Consistent Statements' 'complaint Evidence' 'unsafe and Unsatisfactory Verdicts' 'new Trial']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure'] ['sexual Offences Against a Child' 'delay in Complaint' 'longman Warning' 'evidence of Children by Recording and Closed Circuit Television' 'prior Consistent Statements' 'complaint Evidence' 'unsafe and Unsatisfactory Verdicts' 'new 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 Appeal Against Convictions and Sentences for Sexual Intercourse Offences / Appeal From District Court Jury Convictions and Sentences to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trial judge was required to repeat during the summing up the warnings required by ss 14 and 25(1) of the Evidence (Children) Act 1997 concerning the complainant's evidence by recorded interview and closed-circuit television." "Whether the trial judge erred by failing to warn the jury that it was dangerous to convict on the complainant's evidence." "Whether the trial judge failed adequately to direct the jury about delay in complaint and its prejudice to the appellant's ability to defend himself." "Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury about the use of evidence given by the complainant's mother and Ms McMahon concerning the complainant's statements in October 2000." 'Whether the verdicts were unsafe or unsupported by the evidence, including because the offences were not identified with sufficient particularity.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the trial judge's summing up failed to direct the jury about the prejudice caused by significant delay in complaint, particularly the appellant's impaired ability to defend and test the Crown case, and because the directions concerning the complainant's October 2000 statements blurred the distinction between prior consistent statement evidence admitted under s 108(3) and recent complaint evidence, thereby giving the jury an erroneous impression that delayed complaint could bolster the complainant's credibility. Those errors created the possibility of a miscarriage of justice, although the Court was not persuaded that the verdicts were unsupported by the...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; convictions and sentences quashed; new trial ordered.

Orders

  • ['Appeal be allowed.' 'The convictions and sentences be quashed.' 'There be an order for a new trial.']