SKA v Regina [2012] NSWCCA 205

SKA v Regina [2012] NSWCCA 205

The directions to the jury were inadequate, permitting impermissible propensity reasoning and failing to require separate consideration of each count; the verdicts were unsafe regarding counts 4 and 5, given the significance of complainant's evidence as to dates and the alibi, while a new trial was appropriate for counts 1, 2 and 3.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Conviction / Court of Criminal Appeal, Supreme Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'sexual Assault' 'aggravated Sexual Assault' 'aggravated Indecent Assault' 'challenge to Jury Verdicts' 'context Evidence' 'propensity Reasoning' 'directions to Jury' 'admissibility of Evidence']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'sexual Assault' 'aggravated Sexual Assault' 'aggravated Indecent Assault' 'challenge to Jury Verdicts' 'context Evidence' 'propensity Reasoning' 'directions to Jury' 'admissibility of Evidence']

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

Appeal Against Conviction / Court of Criminal Appeal, Supreme Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether verdicts were unreasonable or not supported by evidence' 'Whether directions given to jury were adequate regarding propensity reasoning and separate consideration of counts' 'Admissibility and effect of new evidence regarding movie release dates' "Significance of complainant's evidence as to dates" 'Whether new trial appropriate']

Ratio Decidendi

The directions to the jury were inadequate, permitting impermissible propensity reasoning and failing to require separate consideration of each count; the verdicts were unsafe regarding counts 4 and 5, given the significance of complainant's evidence as to dates and the alibi, while a new trial was appropriate for counts 1, 2 and 3.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • ['Convictions quashed in respect of all counts' 'Appellant acquitted in respect of counts 4 and 5' 'Retrial ordered in respect of counts 1, 2 and 3']