McKerlie v The State of Western Australia [No 2]

The appeal in McKerlie v The State of Western Australia [No 2] involved the appellant, McKerlie, challenging both his conviction and sentence. McKerlie had been found guilty of one count of indecent assault and two counts of sexual penetration without consent. The appellant contested the sufficiency of the evidence and the fairness of his trial, as well as the length of his sentence. The appeal was heard by the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Western Australia.

The legal issues before the court included whether the trial judge had adequately explained the appellant's right to silence, whether handwritten notes made by the appellant the day after the events could be used to rebut allegations of recent invention, and whether certain evidence, such as telephone company records, was admissible. Furthermore, the court examined whether the appellant's detention overnight due to an error constituted a significant procedural error, potentially affecting his evidence and the fairness of the trial. The admissibility and relevance of information obtained by the trial judge through a private inquiry, which was not disclosed to counsel, was also considered.

The court found that the trial judge's failure to explain the right to silence did not render the trial unfair. The handwritten notes were deemed admissible to rebut the suggestion of recent invention. The telephone company records were found to be new evidence, but their relevance and admissibility were upheld as they corroborated the complainant's testimony. The appellant's detention overnight did not prejudice his evidence or the fairness of the trial. The court also determined that the aggregate sentence of 4 years and 8 months' imprisonment was open on the evidence, and the private inquiry by the trial judge did not undermine the fairness of the proceedings.

The appeal against both conviction and sentence was dismissed. The application to adduce additional evidence on appeal and the application to amend the Appellant's Case by adding grounds of appeal were also dismissed.