PT v The Queen

PT was convicted of two counts of sexual penetration of a child under 10, two counts of indecent acts with a child under 16, and one count of gross indecency. PT appealed against his conviction and sentence. The appeal was heard in the Court of Appeal of the Supreme Court of Victoria. PT argued that the delay in reporting the offences resulted in a significant forensic disadvantage. PT further argued that the absence of the applicant from the jury deliberation process due to illness necessitated an additional warning, and that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive due to changes in his health.

The court was required to decide whether the delay in reporting resulted in a significant forensic disadvantage, whether the absence of the applicant from the jury deliberation process required an additional warning, and whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. The court noted that the forensic disadvantage did not affect the ability to prove the applicant’s guilt. The court further held that no additional warning was required because the jury was adequately warned about the applicant’s absence. The court held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, even taking into account the changes in the applicant’s health. The court concluded that the changes in the applicant’s health did not constitute new evidence warranting a reduction in sentence.

The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.