Ian JACKSON v REGINA [2005] NSWCCA 411
The Court found the trial judge's directions regarding coincidence evidence and consent were proper, had been approved at trial, and did not result in any miscarriage of justice. The similarities between the incidents justified the directions, and the legal tests regarding consent were properly explained to the jury. Leave was refused to raise new arguments not put at trial, and both appeal grounds failed.
- Parties
- Appellant: Ian Jackson; Respondent: Regina
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 30 November 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Coincidence Evidence, Consent, Jury Directions, Misdirection
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Ian Jackson
Appellant
Regina
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether jury was misdirected on coincidence evidence
- 2 Whether jury was misdirected on consent
Ratio Decidendi
The Court found the trial judge's directions regarding coincidence evidence and consent were proper, had been approved at trial, and did not result in any miscarriage of justice. The similarities between the incidents justified the directions, and the legal tests regarding consent were properly explained to the jury. Leave was refused to raise new arguments not put at trial, and both appeal grounds failed.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal against conviction dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment