CLC v R - [2015] NSWCCA 248

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: CLC v R [2015] NSWCCA 248
Hearing dates: 21 August 2015
Decision date: 11 September 2015
Before: Basten JA at [1];
Wilson J at [88];
R S Hulme AJ at [97]
Decision:
(1) Grant the applicant leave to appeal.
(2) Dismiss the appeal.
Catchwords:
APPEAL – criminal conviction – procedure – evidence of complainant child contained in two video recorded police interviews – inconsistencies in complainant’s evidence alleged – whether appropriate for appeal court to view video recordings – SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400; SKA v R [2009] NSWCCA 186 considered

APPEAL – criminal conviction – whether verdict unreasonable or cannot be supported on the evidence – whether appellate court entertained reasonable doubt – ability of jury to weigh complainant’s evidence and appellant’s denials
CRIMINAL LAW – conviction appeal – sexual offences against a child – conviction on evidence of complainant child alone – evidence in chief constituted by two video recorded police interviews – victim cross-examined at trial – inconsistencies in complainant’s evidence given in the first and second interview alleged – failure to refer to alleged incidents in second interview – whether jury’s verdict unreasonable and not supported by evidence
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 66EA
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5, 6
Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), s 15A
Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 306U, 306V
Cases Cited: M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487; [1994] HCA 63
MFA v R (2002) 213 CLR 606
SKA v The Queen [2009] NSWCCA 186
SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400; [2011] HCA 13
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: CLC (Applicant)
Regina (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr W Hunt/Ms J Paingakulam (Applicant)
Mr H Baker (Respondent)
Solicitors:
S E O’Connor – Legal Aid New South Wales (Applicant)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Respondent)

File Number(s): CCA 2009/202060
Publication restriction: Material identifying the complainant and other persons under the age of 18 years at the time of the offences – see Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), s 15A.
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

19 May 2014

Before:

Quirk DCJ and jury

File Number(s):

2009/202060

Judgment

BASTEN JA: In November 2013 the applicant was convicted of four offences involving one complainant, being his step-granddaughter. The four charges arose out of two incidents which were alleged to have occurred between 1 January 2009 and 4 September 2009. The applicant sought leave to appeal from those convictions on the sole ground that the verdict of the jury in respect of each charge was unreasonable and cannot be supported, having regard to the evidence. [1]
1. Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6(1).
The application was not limited to a ground which involves a question of law alone and hence leave was required. [2] Leave was not opposed and should properly be granted. The grant of leave depends not…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading CLC v R

Details

AGLC: CLC v The Queen [2015] NSWCCA 248
Case: [2015] NSWCCA 248
Decision Date: 11 September 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of CLC v R, the appellant sought to appeal his criminal conviction, which was based on the testimony of a child complainant. The case was heard and determined by the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal. The appeal centred on the contention that the jury’s verdict was unreasonable or could not be supported by the evidence. Specifically, the appellant argued that inconsistencies in the child's evidence, as recorded in two police interviews, warranted a different outcome.

The court was required to determine whether it was appropriate to view the video recordings of the police interviews, considering the established principles set out in SKA v The Queen and SKA v R. Additionally, the court had to assess whether the verdict was unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence and whether the appellate court could entertain reasonable doubt about the appellant’s guilt. The court needed to consider the ability of the jury to weigh the child's evidence and the appellant's denials.

The Court of Criminal Appeal held that it was permissible to review the video recordings to assess the inconsistencies in the child's evidence, as per the precedents cited. The court found that the inconsistencies did not render the jury's verdict unreasonable. The evidence presented, including the child's testimony and the appellant's denials, was sufficient for the jury to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty of the offences. The court upheld the conviction, finding no basis to entertain reasonable doubt about the appellant's guilt.

No further orders were made by the court. The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction remained intact.

Orders