Rossi v R [2024] NSWCCA 17

Rossi v R [2024] NSWCCA 17

After independently assessing the whole of the evidence and allowing for the jury's advantage in seeing and hearing the witnesses, the Court held that the evidence was sufficient in nature and quality to eliminate any reasonable doubt about the applicant's guilt on counts 1 to 16. The asserted inconsistencies, deficiencies and implausibilities in the evidence of CN, VL and YL did not require the jury to have entertained a reasonable doubt, and the tendency evidence was capable of supporting the Crown case. It was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the applicant's guilt.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 February 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal; Appeal Against Conviction From Convictions in the District Court of NSW
Outcome
Extension of time granted; leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['unreasonable Verdict' 'verdict Unsupported by Evidence' 'assault With an Act of Indecency' 'common Assault' 'complainant Credibility and Reliability' 'cross Admissible Tendency Evidence']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence' 'appellate Review'] ['unreasonable Verdict' 'verdict Unsupported by Evidence' 'assault With an Act of Indecency' 'common Assault' 'complainant Credibility and Reliability' 'cross Admissible Tendency Evidence']

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 Conviction / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal; Appeal Against Conviction From Convictions in the District Court of NSW

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the verdicts of guilty on counts 1 to 16 were unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence.' 'Whether deficiencies, inconsistencies and asserted implausibilities in the evidence of CN, VL and YL gave rise to a reasonable doubt.' "Whether the complainants' evidence, including evidence cross-admissible for a tendency purpose, was sufficient in nature and quality to eliminate reasonable doubt."]

Ratio Decidendi

After independently assessing the whole of the evidence and allowing for the jury's advantage in seeing and hearing the witnesses, the Court held that the evidence was sufficient in nature and quality to eliminate any reasonable doubt about the applicant's guilt on counts 1 to 16. The asserted inconsistencies, deficiencies and implausibilities in the evidence of CN, VL and YL did not require the jury to have entertained a reasonable doubt, and the tendency evidence was capable of supporting the Crown case. It was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the applicant's guilt.

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted; leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Time be extended to 16 June 2023 for the applicant to file the notice of appeal.' 'Grant leave to appeal.' 'Dismiss the appeal.']