Eric Russell Picker v Regina [2002] NSWCCA 78

Eric Russell Picker v Regina [2002] NSWCCA 78

A miscarriage of justice occurred as a result of impermissible cross-examination by the Crown seeking to force the appellant to label the complainant a liar and to suggest recent fabrication based on counsel's omissions, compounded by failures of the appellant's counsel to put instructions and conduct adequate re-examination; these irregularities were prejudicial and could not be cured by judicial directions alone in a case hinging on the credibility of the parties.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From District Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; new trial ordered
Legal Topics
['impermissible Cross Examination' 'credibility' 'sexual Assault Trials' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'oath Against Oath' 'instructions to Counsel' 're Examination' 'prosecutorial Conduct']
['criminal Law'] ['impermissible Cross Examination' 'credibility' 'sexual Assault Trials' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'oath Against Oath' 'instructions to Counsel' 're Examination' 'prosecutorial Conduct']

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 / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence From District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether impermissible cross-examination by Crown prosecutor resulted in a miscarriage of justice' "Whether failure of appellant's counsel to properly put the appellant's instructions to the complainant compromised the trial" "Whether inadequate re-examination by appellant's counsel further prejudiced the appellant"]

Ratio Decidendi

A miscarriage of justice occurred as a result of impermissible cross-examination by the Crown seeking to force the appellant to label the complainant a liar and to suggest recent fabrication based on counsel's omissions, compounded by failures of the appellant's counsel to put instructions and conduct adequate re-examination; these irregularities were prejudicial and could not be cured by judicial directions alone in a case hinging on the credibility of the parties.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; convictions quashed; new trial ordered

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed' 'Convictions quashed' 'Order that there be a new trial']