KSB v The Queen

This matter came before the High Court of Australia on an application for special leave to appeal. The applicant, KSB, sought to challenge a decision of a lower court concerning evidence presented during his trial. The dispute centred on the way in which previous conduct of the applicant, involving his daughter, was presented to the jury, both by the defence and in the summing up by the trial judge.

The central legal issue was whether the trial judge's summing up had improperly directed the jury regarding the use of previous conduct evidence. Specifically, the applicant argued that the judge had presented this material not merely as evidence relevant to the defence's case, but as corroborative evidence, thereby unduly influencing the jury's assessment of the complainant's testimony. The applicant contended that this direction went beyond the limited purpose for which the defence had introduced the evidence.

The applicant's defence had introduced evidence of prior incidents involving his daughter to demonstrate that her motive for giving evidence against him was to use these past matters as a threat. This was intended to counter her stated reason of embarrassment for a late complaint. The defence also sought to highlight inconsistencies in her account, particularly concerning the timing of events and the nature of the alleged conduct. However, the applicant argued that the summing up presented this material to the jury in an "enlarged way," suggesting it was corroborative and that the jury should accept it as such, rather than leaving its corroborative value entirely to their determination. The applicant submitted that the judge's direction effectively equated the jury's ability to decide on corroboration with a direction that the material *was* corroboration, and indeed, strong corroboration.