BC v R

The appeal by BC against his conviction and sentence in the Supreme Court was heard in the Court of Criminal Appeal. The appellant was convicted of multiple charges, including serious sexual offences against two sisters. The appeal focused on the admissibility of tendency evidence, the separate trials of certain charges, and the probative value versus prejudicial effect of the evidence. The appellant argued that the evidence of prior charges should not have been admitted as tendency evidence and that certain charges should have been tried separately.

The court was required to determine whether the evidence of prior charges, which spanned a period from when the appellant was 11 years old to when he was 28, was admissible as tendency evidence. It also needed to decide whether the charges against the two sisters should have been tried separately due to the risk of prejudice and the potential for the complainants to have conspired to fabricate their accounts. Furthermore, the court had to assess whether the probative value of the evidence was outweighed by its prejudicial effect, particularly in light of the possibility of concoction.

The Court of Criminal Appeal held that the evidence of prior charges was admissible under section 101 of the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) as it had significant probative value in establishing the appellant's propensity to commit the offences. The court found that the probative value outweighed any prejudicial effect, particularly as the possibility of concoction did not negate the probative force of the evidence. The court also concluded that the charges should not have been tried separately as there was no significant risk of prejudice that would outweigh the benefits of a joint trial. The appeal was dismissed.

No orders were made as the appeal was dismissed. The conviction and sentence of the appellant remained intact.