Christophers v The Queen

The appellant, Christophers, appealed against his convictions for indecent dealing with a child under the age of 14 years. The offences were alleged to have occurred 23 years ago. The complainant's evidence was uncorroborated, and the trial judge did not refer to inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence nor address the issue of repressed memories with the jury. The appellant argued that the trial judge failed to properly direct the jury on these matters, resulting in a miscarriage of justice.

The court examined whether the trial judge was required to expressly refer the jury to inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence, and whether the judge needed to address the issue of repressed memories with the jury. The court considered the principles set out in Longman v The Queen, which require a trial judge to warn a jury of any material inconsistencies in uncorroborated evidence of an offence. The court also examined whether the trial judge should have referred to the possibility of repressed memories and its potential impact on the reliability of the complainant's evidence.

The court held that the trial judge did not err in failing to refer the jury to inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence, as the inconsistencies were not significant or material. The court also held that the trial judge was not required to address the issue of repressed memories with the jury, as there was no evidence to suggest that the complainant's memories were repressed. The court found that the appellant's convictions were safe and that there was no miscarriage of justice.

The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant's convictions were upheld. The court did not make any orders regarding costs.