MLB v The Queen

The appeal concerned a conviction for sexual intercourse without consent. The appellant, MLB, was found guilty of this offence, with a plea of guilty to a lesser charge of indecently dealing with a child under 16 years being entered as an alternative. The complainant and the appellant were cousins, and the alleged offence occurred when they were both present at their aunt's house to babysit. The central issue on appeal was whether the trial judge erred in admitting evidence of statements made by the complainant to her aunt, MH, pursuant to section 26E of the *Evidence Act (NT)*.

The legal issues before the court were whether the trial judge had correctly applied section 26E of the *Evidence Act (NT)* in admitting the complainant's statements to MH, whether the judge's directions to the jury regarding the complainant's distress were adequate, and whether the conviction was unreasonable or unsupported by the evidence. The appellant argued that the statements to MH should not have been admitted as evidence, that the directions concerning distress were insufficient, and that the overall evidence did not support a finding of guilt.

The court dismissed the appeal, finding no miscarriage of justice. It reasoned that the trial judge had properly considered the circumstances surrounding the complainant's statements to MH, including the complainant's age, the delay in reporting, her fear of the appellant, and the specific context in which the statements were made. The court found that the complainant's distress during the conversation with MH, which led to her disclosure, was a significant factor supporting the admission of the evidence under section 26E. Furthermore, the court concluded that the directions given to the jury regarding the complainant's distress were sufficient and that the evidence, when considered as a whole, supported the jury's finding of guilt.