PEB v The Queen

The appeal concerned the conviction of the appellant, PEB, for a number of offences, including aggravated sexual assault and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. The appellant was convicted following a trial in the District Court of New South Wales. The appeal was heard by Bell and Keane JJ of the Supreme Court of New South Wales.

The central legal issue before the Court of Appeal was whether the trial judge had erred in admitting certain evidence, specifically evidence of the appellant's prior sexual misconduct. The appellant argued that this evidence was unfairly prejudicial and should not have been admitted, as its probative value was outweighed by the risk of it being used by the jury to infer guilt of the offences charged, rather than for its limited admitted purpose.

Bell and Keane JJ considered the principles governing the admission of evidence of prior misconduct, particularly under the Uniform Evidence Law. They noted that such evidence is generally inadmissible to prove a person's character in order to show that they acted in conformity with that character on a particular occasion. However, they also acknowledged that such evidence may be admissible if it has a tendency to prove or disprove a fact in issue, provided its probative value outweighs any unfair prejudice. In this instance, the Court found that the evidence of prior sexual misconduct had a sufficient tendency to prove a fact in issue, namely the appellant's identity as the perpetrator of the offences charged, and that the trial judge had properly directed the jury on the limited use of this evidence.

The appeal was dismissed.