RC v R [2022] NSWCCA 281

RC v R [2022] NSWCCA 281

The complainant's police statement was wrongly admitted, as the requirements of ss 65 and 106 were not met: crucial parts of the statement were not put to the witness, and the witness's silence or unresponsiveness did not amount to a denial or failure to agree with the substance of the evidence. Furthermore, 'all reasonable steps' were not taken by the Crown to compel the witness to give evidence. The wrongful admission occasioned a miscarriage of justice, requiring all convictions to be quashed and a retrial ordered.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment on Conviction Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; convictions quashed; retrial ordered; leave to appeal ground 2 refused
Legal Topics
['sexual Offences' 'indecent Assault' 'hearsay' 'prior Inconsistent Statement' 'unavailable Witness' 'appeals Against Conviction']
['criminal Law' 'evidence'] ['sexual Offences' 'indecent Assault' 'hearsay' 'prior Inconsistent Statement' 'unavailable Witness' 'appeals Against Conviction']

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 / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment on Conviction Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trial judge erred in admitting the complainant's police statement under ss 65 and 106 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW)" "Whether 'all reasonable steps' were taken to compel the witness to give evidence under s 65 and cl 4(g) of the Evidence Act" "Whether the trial judge erred in directions to the jury relating to the complainant's statement"]

Ratio Decidendi

The complainant's police statement was wrongly admitted, as the requirements of ss 65 and 106 were not met: crucial parts of the statement were not put to the witness, and the witness's silence or unresponsiveness did not amount to a denial or failure to agree with the substance of the evidence. Furthermore, 'all reasonable steps' were not taken by the Crown to compel the witness to give evidence. The wrongful admission occasioned a miscarriage of justice, requiring all convictions to be quashed and a retrial ordered.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; convictions quashed; retrial ordered; leave to appeal ground 2 refused

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal in respect of Ground 1.' 'Uphold Ground 1.' 'The convictions of the applicant in the District Court on 14 December 2020 in respect of Counts 1 to 9 (inclusive), and the sentence imposed on 08 June 2021, be quashed.' 'A new trial be ordered in respect of Counts 1 to 9 (inclusive).' 'The...