R v Alexander

The appellant was convicted of rape, false imprisonment, and threatening to kill. The trial judge directed the jury on the mens rea requirements for the offences and on the defence of consent. The appellant was sentenced to a total effective sentence of five years and three months’ imprisonment, with a non-parole period of three years and nine months. The appellant appealed against conviction and sentence.

The appeal raised issues about the trial judge’s direction to the jury on consent and mens rea, and the adequacy of the sentence. The court had to consider whether the trial judge was required to give a direction to the jury on the issue of mistaken belief by the accused in relation to consent. The court also had to consider whether the evidence was sufficient to conclude that the accused’s statement amounted to a threat to kill, and whether the trial judge should have given a McKinney warning. Finally, the court had to consider whether the sentence was manifestly excessive.

The court found that the trial judge was not required to give a direction to the jury on the issue of mistaken belief in relation to consent, as the defence of consent was not put in issue at trial. The court found that the evidence was sufficient to conclude that the accused’s statement amounted to a threat to kill, and that the trial judge should have given a McKinney warning. However, the court found that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, and dismissed the appeal against conviction and sentence. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety.