REGINA v GALLI [2001] NSWCCA 504

REGINA v GALLI [2001] NSWCCA 504

The admission of Relative Chance of Paternity material in the record of interview and the trial judge's reference to the 99.9999 percentage in summing up were errors, and a warning against impermissible DNA statistical reasoning would have been desirable. However, the admissible and unchallenged Paternity Index evidence that it was 2.4 million times more likely that the appellant was the biological father than a person taken at random, combined with the exceptionally limited class of possible offenders and elimination of two other carers by DNA testing, made conviction inevitable. The errors were not fundamental and the proviso in Criminal Appeal Act 1912, s6(1) applied. The sentence was...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Decision After Jury Conviction and Sentence in the District Court
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed. Leave to appeal against sentence granted. Appeal against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
['dna Evidence' 'paternity Index' 'relative Chance of Paternity' "prosecutor's Fallacy" 'circumstantial Evidence' 'proviso Under Criminal Appeal Act 1912, S6(1)' 'aggravated Sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'sentence Appeal']
['criminal Law' 'evidence' 'criminal Procedure' 'sentencing'] ['dna Evidence' 'paternity Index' 'relative Chance of Paternity' "prosecutor's Fallacy" 'circumstantial Evidence' 'proviso Under Criminal Appeal Act 1912, S6(1)' 'aggravated Sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'sentence Appeal']

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 and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Decision After Jury Conviction and Sentence in the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether references in the appellant's second record of interview to Relative Chance of Paternity percentages were inadmissible and caused a miscarriage of justice." "Whether the trial judge failed to give adequate directions about the use of DNA evidence, including statistical reasoning and the Prosecutor's Fallacy." "Whether the trial judge's circumstantial evidence directions reversed or suggested a reversal of the Crown onus of proof." 'Whether the verdict could be supported having regard to the evidence.' 'Whether the proviso in Criminal Appeal Act 1912, s6(1) should be applied despite errors at trial.' 'Whether the sentence of seven years imprisonment with a non-parole period of five years and three months was outside the available range.']

Ratio Decidendi

The admission of Relative Chance of Paternity material in the record of interview and the trial judge's reference to the 99.9999 percentage in summing up were errors, and a warning against impermissible DNA statistical reasoning would have been desirable. However, the admissible and unchallenged Paternity Index evidence that it was 2.4 million times more likely that the appellant was the biological father than a person taken at random, combined with the exceptionally limited class of possible offenders and elimination of two other carers by DNA testing, made conviction inevitable. The errors were not fundamental and the proviso in Criminal Appeal Act 1912, s6(1) applied. The sentence was...

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed. Leave to appeal against sentence granted. Appeal against sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Appeal against conviction dismissed.' 'Leave to appeal against sentence granted.' 'Appeal against sentence dismissed.']