SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
COURT OF APPEAL
Case Title: | Kelly v The Queen |
Citation: | [2017] ACTCA 42 |
Hearing Date: | 11 August 2015 |
DecisionDate: | 22 September 2017 |
Before: | Penfold ACJ, Refshauge and Gilmour JJ |
Decision: | The appeal is dismissed. |
Catchwords: | APPEAL – CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal from Supreme Court – trial by jury – appeal against convictions – particular offences – committing an act of indecency on or in the presence of a young person under the age of 16 years – judge should not have allowed images of child pornography to be put to the jury – convictions unsafe and unsound – appeal dismissed CRIMINAL LAW – EVDIENCE – Evidentiary matters relating to witness and accused persons – tendency evidence – sexual offences – attraction to young girls – relationship evidence – photographic evidence – probative value is outweighed by unfair prejudice CRIMINAL LAW – EVDIENCE – Evidentiary matters relating to witness and accused persons – witness interviews – transcripts and statements – phone recordings between the accused and his daughters CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Verdict – appeal against conviction – unsafe and unsatisfactory verdict – ground not made out – appeal dismissed |
Legislation Cited: | Evidence Act 2011 (ACT), s 97 Evidence (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1991 (ACT), Div 4.2A, 4.2B Supreme Court Act 1933 (ACT), ss 37O(3), 37E |
Cases Cited: | Azzopardi v The Queen [2001] HCA 25; 205 CLR 50 Butera v Director of Public Prosecutions (1987) 164 CLR 180 |
Parties: | Stanley James Kelly (Appellant) The Queen (Respondent) |
Representation: | Counsel In person (Appellant) Mr J White SC (Respondent) |
| Solicitors Unrepresented (Appellant) ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent) | |
File Number: | ACTCA 18 of 2014 |
Decision under appeal: | Court: ACT Supreme Court Before: Murrell CJ Date of Decision: 15 April 2014 |
Continue reading Kelly v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Kelly v The Queen [2017] ACTCA 42
- Case
- [2017] ACTCA 42
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issues before the Court were whether the trial judge erred in allowing images of child pornography to be put to the jury, and whether the convictions were rendered unsafe and unsound as a result. The Court also considered whether the probative value of certain evidence, including tendency evidence suggesting an attraction to young girls, relationship evidence, photographic evidence, and transcripts of witness interviews and phone recordings, was outweighed by unfair prejudice.
The Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed the appeal. It was held that the convictions were not unsafe or unsound. The Court found that the admission of the child pornography images, while potentially prejudicial, did not render the verdict unsafe. The Court applied principles relating to the admissibility of evidence, balancing probative value against unfair prejudice, and concluded that the jury's verdict was sound.
Orders
Orders of the court
The appeal is dismissed.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.