Kerim v The Queen

The case of *Kerim v The Queen* came before the High Court of Australia. The applicant, Allan Griffiths Kerim, sought special leave to appeal against a decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal. The dispute concerned the admissibility of evidence relating to alleged indecent acts committed by the applicant against the complainant some years prior to the offence for which he was convicted.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the Court of Criminal Appeal had erred in admitting evidence of prior indecent acts, despite the complainant stating that the applicant's "guilty passion" for her had ceased three years before the rape for which he was convicted. The applicant argued that this evidence, particularly in light of his acquittal on a charge of indecent dealing with the complainant when she was younger, should not have been admitted. A further issue was the applicant's contention that the Court of Criminal Appeal's decision was based on authorities that were wrongly decided.

The applicant's argument focused on challenging the correctness of the decisions in *Witham* and *TJW*. He submitted that *TJW*, an Attorney-General's reference, was unsatisfactory as it lacked argument on the opposing side and proceeded on the assumption that *Witham* had not been affected by recent High Court decisions, rather than directly questioning the validity of *Witham*. The applicant contended that the jury might have improperly considered the evidence of prior indecent acts, even though he had been acquitted of those specific charges, because the Court of Criminal Appeal had relied on the authority of *Witham* to admit it. The Court of Criminal Appeal had found that the evidence of prior acts was capable of being regarded by the jury as having stimulated the appellant's sexual interest and as confirming his sexual penetration of the complainant.