Jarvis & Surfside Bus Lines Pty Ltd v Scrase

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:	R v D [1999] QCA 441
PARTIES:	R v D
FILE NO/S:	CA No 227 of 1999 Indictment No 97A of 1999
DIVISION:	Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:	Appeal against Conviction
ORIGINATING	District Court at Gladstone
COURT:
DELIVERED ON:	29 October 1999
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	13 September 1999
JUDGES:	Pincus JA, McPherson JA, Ambrose J
ORDER:	Appeal against conviction dismissed

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW – PARTICULAR OFFENCES – SEXUAL OFFENCES – conviction on counts of indecent dealing and attempted rape – whether verdicts unsafe or unsatisfactory – effect of discrepancies in complainant's account of when alleged offences committed – whether open to jury to conclude that improprieties committed by appellant and not by complainant

CRIMINAL LAW – EVIDENTIARY MATTERS RELATING TO WITNESSES AND ACCUSED PERSONS – CORROBORATION – interval of up to twenty years between alleged offences and proceedings – whether Longman direction warranted – corroborative effect of admissions

E CA No 370 of 1998, 5 March 1999; [1999] QCA 58
Longman (1989) 168 CLR 79
M [1997] 1 Qd R 404; [1996] QCA 230
Sakail [1993] 1 Qd R 312
Robinson (1999) 73 ALJR 1314; [1999] HCA 42

SOLICITORS:  Dearden Lawyers for the appellant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the
respondent

1. PINCUS JA: The appellant was convicted of sexual offences alleged to have been committed on the complainant who was aged between 8 and 15 years at the time of the offences charged. The notice of appeal contained one ground only, that the verdicts were unsafe and unsatisfactory, but at the hearing the appellant was given leave to add the following ground:

   "The learned trial judge failed to adequately warn the jury of the danger of convicting having regard to the complainant's lengthy delay in making a complaint".

2. It is necessary to deal with the complaint that the verdict was unsafe, but the subject should be introduced by saying that there was, to an unusual degree, evidence apart from that of the complainant, suggesting that she was sexually abused by the appellant. That evidence consisted principally in a tape-recording of a telephone conversation between the complainant and the appellant, during which he admitted having molested her as a child and expressed regret for having done so.

3. There were seven counts, each alleged to have been committed within a specified period, the earliest date mentioned being 10 October 1979 and the latest 1 November 1986. Five of the counts alleged unlawful and indecent dealing and two of them attempted rape.

   Counts 1, 2 and 3

4. The principal argument put by Mr Rafter, who appeared for the appellant, on the question of lack of safety of the verdicts, had to do with counts 1, 2 and 3 which were allegations of indecent dealing. The weakness on which the argument fastened was that there was evidence on the basis of which it appeared, so it was said, that the appellant was not present in the household of which the complainant was a member at the…