R v Denton [2019] NSWCCA 81

R v Denton [2019] NSWCCA 81

In the absence of expert evidence of abnormality, comparing the photographs and drawings of the respondent's penis risked inviting the jury to speculate about distinctions they were not qualified to make, with significant unfair prejudice outweighing limited probative value. Thus, the trial judge was correct to exclude the photographs under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), and the prosecution appeal was dismissed.

Parties
Prosecutor: Regina; Respondent: Thomas Denton
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Prosecution Interlocutory Appeal / Appeal Against District Court Evidentiary Ruling
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeals Against Evidentiary Rulings, Sexual Offences Involving Children, Admissibility of Photographs, Relevance, Probative Value Versus Unfair Prejudice
Criminal Law Evidence Appeals Against Evidentiary Rulings Sexual Offences Involving Children Admissibility of Photographs Relevance Probative Value Versus Unfair Prejudice

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

Thomas Denton

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Prosecution Interlocutory Appeal / Appeal Against District Court Evidentiary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether police photographs of the accused's penis were admissible for comparison with complainant's drawings
  2. 2 Whether exclusion of the photographs under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) (danger of unfair prejudice) was correct

Ratio Decidendi

In the absence of expert evidence of abnormality, comparing the photographs and drawings of the respondent's penis risked inviting the jury to speculate about distinctions they were not qualified to make, with significant unfair prejudice outweighing limited probative value. Thus, the trial judge was correct to exclude the photographs under s 137 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), and the prosecution appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Prosecution appeal under s 5F(3A) dismissed