Danny (a pseudonym) v The Queen

The applicant, referred to as Danny, appealed his conviction on three counts of committing an indecent act with a child under 16 years and one count of attempting to commit an indecent act with a child under 16 years. The appeal was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The case involved two child complainants who provided accounts of the alleged incidents, which Danny contested. The primary issues before the court were whether the verdicts were unreasonable due to inconsistencies in and implausibility of the complainants’ accounts, and whether there was a substantial miscarriage of justice due to the trial judge's failure to give an unreliability warning to the jury.

The court found that there were no material inconsistencies in the accounts of the two child complainants, and the verdicts were not unreasonable. Furthermore, the court held that the trial judge did not err in failing to give an unreliability warning to the jury. The court considered the relevant provisions of the Jury Directions Act 2015 and the Evidence Act 2008, as well as the decisions in Young v The Queen [2015] VSCA 265, Hudson (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2017] VSCA 122, and Wade (a pseudonym) v The Queen [2019] VSCA 168. The court concluded that the verdicts were open to the jury and the appeal was dismissed.

Although leave to appeal was granted, the Supreme Court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it. The court held that the trial judge had correctly applied the law and that there was no substantial miscarriage of justice in the proceedings. The decision of the trial court was upheld, and Danny's convictions remained intact.