Day v The Queen

The appellant, Day, sought leave to appeal against his conviction and sentence for offences including indecent assault and sexual intercourse. The prosecution's case involved allegations of sexual misconduct by the appellant, a music teacher, against a pupil, TC, during piano lessons. The appeal was heard by the Court.

The legal issues before the Court concerned the admissibility of certain evidence, specifically a "pretext call" made by the complainant to the appellant, and whether the trial judge had adequately explained the relevant legal principles to the jury. The Court was also required to determine whether the trial judge had erred in the exercise of their sentencing discretion.

The Court held that evidence is admissible if it rationally affects the assessment of the probability of a fact in issue, even if it relates to credibility, and therefore does not offend the "bolster rule". The pretext call was deemed admissible as it contained admissions, or at least implied admissions, by the appellant concerning inappropriate conduct of a sexual nature within the teacher-pupil relationship. The trial judge's use of evidence of an altercation outside a church to provide context for the pretext call was also considered permissible, and the judge's reasons were found not to be inadequate.

Permission to appeal against sentence was refused, and the appeal was dismissed. The Court found that the head sentence imposed was consistent with established precedent, and the non-parole period was within the range commonly applied by the Court of Criminal Appeal.