4 Jan 2023
The High Court held the Magistrate's credibility findings were not plainly wrong, admitted the 2nd appellant's record of interview, found the observation evidence and admissions supported an irresistible inference of employment under s38AA, and therefore upheld both convictions and the 22‑month sentence for the 1st appellant.
24 Aug 2005
The magistrate erred by failing to apply the objective test for duress of circumstances to undisputed facts (plainclothes officers in unmarked vehicles at night, youth occupants, contemporaneous 999 calls and driving to a police station); because the defence was available and the magistrate did not consider the evidence in that light, the convictions were unsafe and the appeal must be allowed.
17 Mar 2005
The conviction was safe because the jury were fairly and adequately directed and the totality of compelling forensic and circumstantial evidence (DNA, semen match, palm print, footprints, blood evidence and injuries) established guilt beyond reasonable doubt; the absence of one witness did not make a fair trial impossible and the cautioned interview was properly admitted; sentencing discretion to impose life was correctly exercised but the minimum term was excessive and reduced from 25 to 20 years.
5 Mar 2003
The magistrate properly admitted and could rely on the appellant's voluntary video recorded interview; his credibility assessments of prosecution witnesses were within permissible bounds and not perverse; the appellant's admissions, together with corroborating circumstantial and documentary evidence, established deliberate and dishonest concealment of a conflict of interest and conduct intended to benefit her husband such that convictions for misconduct in public office and for obtaining pecuniary advantage by deception (s.18) were sustainable, save that the 10th obtaining charge failed becau…