Regina v Bond [2000] NSWCCA 518

Regina v Bond [2000] NSWCCA 518

The appeal was allowed because the case went to the jury on an incorrect and incomplete basis concerning the complainant's knowledge of and claim for victim compensation, and because credibility material concerning Eric Frank Whitfield could have affected how the jury assessed evidence supporting the complainant. In a case where credibility was very important, there was a reasonable possibility that if the jury had known of these matters their verdicts could have been different, so the convictions and sentences were quashed and a new trial ordered.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal From District Court Convictions and Sentences
Outcome
Appeal allowed; convictions and sentences quashed; new trial ordered.
Legal Topics
['sexual Offences' 'fresh or New Evidence' 'prosecution Disclosure' 'credibility of Complainant and Prosecution Witness' 'victim Compensation Material' 'unreasonable or Inconsistent Verdicts' 'jury Directions']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['sexual Offences' 'fresh or New Evidence' 'prosecution Disclosure' 'credibility of Complainant and Prosecution Witness' 'victim Compensation Material' 'unreasonable or Inconsistent Verdicts' 'jury Directions']

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 Appeal From District Court Convictions and Sentences

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether fresh or new evidence and undisclosed material concerning the complainant's victim compensation claim and Eric Frank Whitfield's credibility gave rise to a miscarriage of justice." "Whether there was a reasonable possibility that the jury's verdicts could have been different if it had known of those matters." 'Whether the not guilty verdict on count 1 was inconsistent with the guilty verdicts on counts 2 to 9.' 'Whether the guilty verdicts on counts 2 to 9 were unreasonable or incapable of being supported by the evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because the case went to the jury on an incorrect and incomplete basis concerning the complainant's knowledge of and claim for victim compensation, and because credibility material concerning Eric Frank Whitfield could have affected how the jury assessed evidence supporting the complainant. In a case where credibility was very important, there was a reasonable possibility that if the jury had known of these matters their verdicts could have been different, so the convictions and sentences were quashed and a new trial ordered.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed; convictions and sentences quashed.' 'A new trial be had.']