BC v R

The appellant, BC, appealed against his conviction for multiple child sexual assault offences against four young children. The appellant was found guilty and an aggregate sentence was imposed. The appellant argued that the guilty verdicts on counts one, two and three were unreasonable as the offences were committed when he was aged between 11 and 13, and that the Crown had not rebutted the doli incapax presumption. The appellant also argued that evidence of the complainants should not have been admitted as tendency evidence on counts involving other complainants, as the probative value of the evidence was not substantially outweighed by the prejudicial effect. The court considered whether the guilty verdicts on counts one, two and three were unreasonable, and whether the Crown had rebutted the doli incapax presumption. The court found that the evidence did not establish that the appellant understood the nature and quality of his acts to the requisite standard, and that the Crown had not rebutted the doli incapax presumption. The court therefore quashed the guilty verdicts on counts one, two and three. The court also considered whether the evidence of the complainants was admissible as tendency evidence on counts involving other complainants. The court found that the probative value of the evidence was substantially outweighed by the prejudicial effect, and that it should not have been admitted. The appeal was allowed in relation to the conviction on counts one, two and three, and dismissed in respect of counts four to twenty. The convictions on counts one, two and three were quashed and the appellant was acquitted of those offences.