R v WM (No 2) [2019] NSWDC 861
The Court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that WM committed the offence of sexual intercourse without consent as charged in counts 1 and 2, nor the alternative offence of attempted sexual intercourse without consent. Complaints and contemporaneous evidence provided insufficient support for the prosecution case, and the defence of mental illness was not established on the balance of probabilities.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 09 December 2019
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Special Hearing
- Outcome
- not guilty
- Legal Topics
- ['sexual Offences' 'mental Illness Defence' 'burden of Proof' 'attempted Offences']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Special Hearing
Legal Issues
- 1 ['whether WM engaged in oral sexual intercourse with the complainant without consent' 'whether WM engaged in penile-vaginal sexual intercourse with the complainant without consent' 'whether WM attempted to have sexual intercourse without consent' 'whether WM had knowledge of the lack of consent' 'whether WM was not guilty by reason of mental illness']
Ratio Decidendi
The Court was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that WM committed the offence of sexual intercourse without consent as charged in counts 1 and 2, nor the alternative offence of attempted sexual intercourse without consent. Complaints and contemporaneous evidence provided insufficient support for the prosecution case, and the defence of mental illness was not established on the balance of probabilities.
Court Disposition
not guilty
Orders
- ['WM is found not guilty of counts 1 and 2 on the indictment.' 'WM is found not guilty in respect of the alternative offence of attempted sexual intercourse without consent.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment