RD (a pseudonym) v R [2021] NSWCCA 94

RD (a pseudonym) v R [2021] NSWCCA 94

The convictions on Counts 1, 2, 8, and 12 were quashed as the complainant's evidence in relation to those counts was expressed in general terms and not as a specific recollection of the particular alleged events—thus it was not open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt. For other counts, the evidence disclosed sufficient specificity for the jury to be so satisfied.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Partly allowed. Convictions on specified counts quashed and verdicts of acquittal entered. Orders made for resentencing on remaining counts. Appeal otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'sexual Offences' 'indecent Assault' 'quashing Convictions' 'acquittal' 'evidentiary Sufficiency' 'jury Directions']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'sexual Offences' 'indecent Assault' 'quashing Convictions' 'acquittal' 'evidentiary Sufficiency' '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 / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the verdicts on certain counts were unreasonable or not supported by the evidence' "Whether the complainant's evidence was specific to particular charges or generalised assertions of misconduct" 'Appropriateness of verdicts of acquittal or ordering new trials in relation to quashed convictions']

Ratio Decidendi

The convictions on Counts 1, 2, 8, and 12 were quashed as the complainant's evidence in relation to those counts was expressed in general terms and not as a specific recollection of the particular alleged events—thus it was not open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt. For other counts, the evidence disclosed sufficient specificity for the jury to be so satisfied.

Court Disposition

Partly allowed. Convictions on specified counts quashed and verdicts of acquittal entered. Orders made for resentencing on remaining counts. Appeal otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal in respect of convictions on Counts 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13 and 14.' 'Allow appeal in relation to convictions on Counts 1, 2, 8 and 12 of the Indictment dated 22 May 2019.' 'Quash convictions on Counts 1, 2, 8 and 12.' 'Direct verdict of acquittal on Counts 1, 2, 8 and 12.' 'Quash...