RRS v R [2013] NSWCCA 94

RRS v R [2013] NSWCCA 94

There was no error in the trial judge's directions as there was no serious or specific suggestion of collusion between the two complainants and no inappropriate jury direction regarding the use of one complainant's evidence in relation to the other. The trial judge was not required to issue a warning under s 165 Evidence Act 1995 as the reliability of the complaint evidence was directly placed in issue and adequately addressed in summing up and by the conduct of the defence case. Both grounds of appeal are dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['aggravated Sexual Assault' 'aggravated Indecent Assault' 'jury Directions' 'evidence of Complaint' 'hearsay' 'direction Under S 165 Evidence Act 1995' 'collusion and Concoction' 'cross Admissibility']
['criminal Law'] ['aggravated Sexual Assault' 'aggravated Indecent Assault' 'jury Directions' 'evidence of Complaint' 'hearsay' 'direction Under S 165 Evidence Act 1995' 'collusion and Concoction' 'cross Admissibility']

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 / Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the trial judge erred in failing to give a direction in accordance with R v Mayberry [2000] NSWCCA 531' 'Whether the trial judge erred in not giving a warning under s 165 of the Evidence Act 1995 regarding hearsay evidence']

Ratio Decidendi

There was no error in the trial judge's directions as there was no serious or specific suggestion of collusion between the two complainants and no inappropriate jury direction regarding the use of one complainant's evidence in relation to the other. The trial judge was not required to issue a warning under s 165 Evidence Act 1995 as the reliability of the complaint evidence was directly placed in issue and adequately addressed in summing up and by the conduct of the defence case. Both grounds of appeal are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed']