Regina v WJW [2004] NSWCCA 360

Regina v WJW [2004] NSWCCA 360

The appeal was dismissed because, although some minor criticisms could be made of the summing-up, when considered as a whole it was not so lacking in balance as to cause a miscarriage of justice and the trial was not unfair. The guilty verdicts could properly be reconciled with the acquittals on counts 4 and 5 on the basis that the jury may have accepted the complainant generally but not been satisfied that counts 4 and 5 occurred within the relevant time period. After independently reviewing the evidence and giving due weight to the jury's advantage in seeing and hearing the witnesses, it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of guilt on counts 1, 2, 3 and 6.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 November 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Jury Convictions; Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence Not Pressed
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'unbalanced or Unfair Summing Up' 'unreasonable or Unsupported Verdicts' 'inconsistent Verdicts' 'child Sexual Assault Allegations' 'jury Directions' 'assessment of Witness Credibility']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'unbalanced or Unfair Summing Up' 'unreasonable or Unsupported Verdicts' 'inconsistent Verdicts' 'child Sexual Assault Allegations' 'jury Directions' 'assessment of Witness Credibility']

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 / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Jury Convictions; Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence Not Pressed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the trial miscarried because the trial judge's summing-up was unbalanced and the trial unfair." 'Whether the guilty verdicts on counts 1, 2, 3 and 6 were inconsistent with the not guilty verdicts on counts 4 and 5.' 'Whether the guilty verdicts on counts 1, 2, 3 and 6 were unreasonable and could not be supported having regard to the evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because, although some minor criticisms could be made of the summing-up, when considered as a whole it was not so lacking in balance as to cause a miscarriage of justice and the trial was not unfair. The guilty verdicts could properly be reconciled with the acquittals on counts 4 and 5 on the basis that the jury may have accepted the complainant generally but not been satisfied that counts 4 and 5 occurred within the relevant time period. After independently reviewing the evidence and giving due weight to the jury's advantage in seeing and hearing the witnesses, it was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of guilt on counts 1, 2, 3 and 6.

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal against conviction dismissed']