BCM v The Queen

The appellant, BCM, appealed to the High Court of Australia against a decision of the Court of Appeal which had upheld his convictions for indecent dealing with a child under 12 years. The prosecution's case relied entirely on the evidence of the child complainant, E, who was six years old at the time of the alleged offences. The appeal raised questions concerning the reasonableness and evidentiary support for the jury's verdicts, and the adequacy of the Court of Appeal's reasons in assessing the complainant's evidence.

The High Court was required to determine whether the Court of Appeal had erred in failing to adequately assess the evidence and provide sufficient reasons for its conclusion that the verdicts were supported by the evidence. Furthermore, the Court had to consider whether the Court of Appeal was correct in not concluding that the verdicts were unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence, particularly in light of inconsistencies in the complainant's account.

The High Court acknowledged that while criticisms could be made of the Court of Appeal's analysis, its ultimate conclusion that the verdicts should not be set aside was correct. The Court reasoned that inconsistencies in a child complainant's evidence do not automatically render a verdict unsafe or unsatisfactory, provided those inconsistencies do not go to the essential features of the account of the offences. The Court found that the jury was entitled to accept the complainant's evidence, and the Court of Appeal's reasons, though perhaps brief, did not demonstrate an error in law.

Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal.