Piddington (a pseudonym) v The King - [2023] NSWDC 106

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Piddington (a pseudonym) v R [2023] NSWDC 106
Hearing dates: 15 March 2023
Date of orders: 21 April 2023
Decision date: 21 April 2023
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Priestley SC DCJ
Decision:
See [Orders: 1&2]

Catchwords:
CRIME — Sexual offences — Aggravated sexual assault — Victim
CRIME — Violent offences — Common assault

Legislation Cited:
Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW)
Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW)
Evidence Act 1995 (SW)

Cases Cited:
Charara v R [2006] NSWCCA 244
Dyason v Butterworth [2015] NSWCA 52
Lunney v DPP [2021] NSWCA 186
Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v SZVFW 92018) 163 ALD 1
Fox v Percy [2003] HCA 22
R v Markuleski [2001] NSWCCA 290; 52 NSWLR 82
Ewen v R [2015] NSWCCA 117
R v Edwards (1993) 178 CLR 193
Passmore v R [2023] NSWCCA 65
Jones v The Queen [1997] HCA 56; (1997) 191 CLR
RWC v R [2013] NSWCCA 58

Texts Cited:
NA

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Rex (Crown)
Piddington (a pseudonym) (Appellant)
Representation:
Counsel:
Higgins (Appellant)
Solicitors:
Webb (Crown)
Marshall (Appellant)

File Number(s): 2020/00318391
Publication restriction: Anonymised

JUDGMENT

Approach to section 18 appeal
Basis of appeal
The magistrate’s reasons
The charges
The facts
The facts of the charges
Sequence 3 (Penile / vaginal sexual assault)
Sequence 4 (digital penetration)
Sequence 5 (Digital penetration)
Sequence 8 (assault occasioning)
Sequence 6 (common assault)
Sequence 7 (common assault)
Sequence 2 (sexual assault penile / vaginal)

Magistrate’s consideration.
Directions
The magistrate’s determination of each sequence
Sequence 3 (sexual assault: penile / vaginal)
Sequence 4 (sexual assault: digital / vaginal)
Sequence 5 (sexual assault: digital / vaginal)
Sequence 8 (AOABH: stepping on foot)
Sequence 6: (hand squeezing)
Sequence 7 (common assault: slap to face)
Sequence 2 (sexual assault: penile / vaginal)

Parties’ submissions
Consideration
Determination of appeal
Sequence 6
Sequence 2

Orders

JUDGMENT

This is an appeal pursuant to section 18 of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act of a decision of the Children’s Court to convict the appellant (referred to herein as either the young person or the appellant) on one charge of sexual intercourse without consent and one charge of common assault. In respect of 5 other charges the appellant was acquitted. The reasoning behind those acquittals is relevant to the argument made on appeal and reference will be made to those matters accordingly.

Approach to section 18 appeal

The approach to take in respect to an appeal under section 18 has been the subject of numerous Court of Appeal and Court of Criminal Appeal decisions. The approach I take is based on cases such as Charara v R [2006] NSWCCA 244 and Dyason v Butterworth [2015] NSWCA 52 and is as follows:

An appeal against conviction is to proceed by way of a rehearing on the basis of evidence given in the original Local Court proceedings: s18(1) Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001.

The appellate judge is to form their own judgment of the facts while recognising the…

Grounds of appeal

[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 Piddington (a pseudonym) v The King

Details

AGLC: Piddington (a pseudonym) v The King [2023] NSWDC 106
Case: [2023] NSWDC 106
Decision Date: 21 April 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Piddington (a pseudonym) v The King, the defendant faced charges of aggravated sexual assault and common assault. The case was heard by the High Court of Australia, which was tasked with examining the evidence and applying the relevant legal principles to determine the defendant's culpability. The crux of the dispute hinged on the interpretation of the relevant statutes, particularly the definitions and elements of the offences of aggravated sexual assault and common assault, and whether the prosecution had adequately proven the defendant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

The court was required to address several key legal issues. These included the interpretation of the terms "aggravated sexual assault" and "common assault" as defined in the Crimes Act, the burden of proof in criminal cases, and the admissibility and weight to be given to certain pieces of evidence, including witness testimonies and forensic evidence. The court also needed to consider the applicability of any defences raised by the defendant and whether they were substantiated by the evidence presented.

The court carefully examined the evidence and legal arguments presented by both parties. It concluded that the prosecution had successfully demonstrated the essential elements of both charges. The court found that the defendant's actions met the criteria for aggravated sexual assault due to the nature and circumstances of the assault, and also established the lesser charge of common assault. The court emphasised the importance of the victim's testimony and corroborating evidence in reaching its decision. In light of these findings, the court upheld the convictions on both counts.

The orders of the court are detailed in [Orders: 1&2], which outline the specific consequences for the defendant's convictions, including sentencing and any other legal ramifications.

Orders

Orders of the court

See [Orders: 1&2]

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Medium Neutral Citation:	Piddington (a pseudonym) v R [2023] NSWDC 106
Hearing dates:	15 March 2023
Date of orders:	21 April 2023
Decision date:	21 April 2023
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Priestley SC DCJ
Decision:	See [Orders: 1&2]
Catchwords:	CRIME — Sexual offences — Aggravated sexual assault — Victim CRIME — Violent offences — Common assault
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) Supreme Court Act 1970 (NSW) Evidence Act 1995 (SW)
Cases Cited:	Charara v R [2006] NSWCCA 244 Dyason v Butterworth [2015] NSWCA 52 Lunney v DPP [2021] NSWCA 186 Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v SZVFW 92018) 163 ALD 1 Fox v Percy [2003] HCA 22 R v Markuleski [2001] NSWCCA 290; 52 NSWLR 82 Ewen v R [2015] NSWCCA 117 R v Edwards (1993) 178 CLR 193 Passmore v R [2023] NSWCCA 65 Jones v The Queen [1997] HCA 56; (1997) 191 CLR RWC v R [2013] NSWCCA 58
Texts Cited:	NA
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Rex (Crown) Piddington (a pseudonym) (Appellant)
Representation:	Counsel: Higgins (Appellant) Solicitors: Webb (Crown) Marshall (Appellant)
File Number(s):	2020/00318391
Publication restriction:	Anonymised