1. The conviction of Sarah Jane Parkinson for making a false accusation on 20 December 2012 be set aside.
2. Sarah Jane Parkinson be acquitted of making a false accusation on 20 December 2012.
3. The conviction of Sarah Jane Parkinson for making a false accusation on 21 March 2014 be set aside.
4. The appeal be otherwise dismissed.
5. The convictions for public mischief on 1 June 2014, 2 July 2014 and 13 July 2014 be confirmed.
6. The parties be invited to make submissions on any consequential orders to be made.
Catchwords:
APPEAL – CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal from the Magistrates Court – tendency evidence – trial directions – reverse Liberato – Crown’s oral submissions inconsistent with written submissions at first instance – latent ambiguity – miscarriage of justice – appeal upheld in part
CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and punishment – accused convicted but not yet sentenced – making a false allegation – public mischief
EVIDENCE – TENDENCY EVIDENCE – False allegations of criminal conduct against people – providing police with false, misleading or inaccurate information – tendency not formulated as per notice – no opportunity for accused to challenge the evidence – evidence inadmissible
[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.
[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.
[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.
Consideration
[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.
[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.
Continue reading Parkinson v Alexander
Sign in free to access the full text
Details
AGLC
Parkinson v Alexander [2017] ACTSC 201
Case
[2017] ACTSC 201
Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Sarah Jane Parkinson was charged and convicted in the Magistrates Court for making false allegations of criminal conduct and public mischief. She appealed against her conviction, arguing that the trial judge's direction regarding the admission of tendency evidence was flawed. The appeal focused on the admissibility of certain evidence and the trial judge's handling of it. The court considered whether the trial judge erred in admitting evidence without a proper formulation of the tendency, and whether this led to a miscarriage of justice.
The court had to decide whether the trial judge erred in admitting evidence without a proper formulation of the tendency, and whether this error led to a miscarriage of justice. The court also needed to determine whether the oral submissions made by the Crown were inconsistent with their written submissions at first instance, and if this inconsistency prejudiced the appellant. Additionally, the court examined whether the trial judge's direction on the latent ambiguity in the charge of making a false allegation led to a miscarriage of justice.
The court found that the trial judge erred in admitting evidence without a proper formulation of the tendency. This error was deemed to be a miscarriage of justice because it prevented the appellant from properly challenging the evidence. The court also found that the oral submissions made by the Crown were inconsistent with their written submissions at first instance, which prejudiced the appellant. However, the court determined that the latent ambiguity in the charge of making a false allegation did not lead to a miscarriage of justice. The convictions for making false allegations were set aside, but the convictions for public mischief were confirmed. The court invited the parties to make submissions on any consequential orders to be made.
The court set aside the convictions for making false allegations and acquitted the appellant of those charges. The convictions for public mischief were confirmed. The court also invited the parties to make submissions on any consequential orders to be made.
Orders
Orders of the court
1. The conviction of Sarah Jane Parkinson for making a false accusation on 20 December 2012 be set aside.
2. Sarah Jane Parkinson be acquitted of making a false accusation on 20 December 2012.
3. The conviction of Sarah Jane Parkinson for making a false accusation on 21 March 2014 be set aside.
4. The appeal be otherwise dismissed.
5. The convictions for public mischief on 1 June 2014, 2 July 2014 and 13 July 2014 be confirmed.
6. The parties be invited to make submissions on any consequential orders to be made.