R v Cassebohm

In *R v Cassebohm*, the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia considered an appeal against a jury conviction of the appellant on six counts of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. The alleged offences occurred between December 1985 and March 1986, when the complainant was 14 years old and employed by the appellant. A significant delay of approximately 24 years occurred between the alleged offending and the trial.

The central legal issues before the Court were whether the trial judge’s directions to the jury were adequate, particularly in light of the substantial delay and the resulting forensic disadvantages. This involved determining the applicability and interpretation of s 34CB of the *Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935* (SA), which concerns the abolition of the "Longman warning" in sexual offence cases. The Court also had to consider whether the jury should have been specifically warned that any lies or inconsistencies admitted by the appellant in his evidence did not necessarily equate to guilt, and whether the overall verdict was unsafe due to these factors.

The Court allowed the appeal, finding that s 34CB of the *Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935* (SA) applied to the case. It held that the considerable lapse of time between the alleged offences and the trial had created significant forensic disadvantages, including the loss of the police investigation file and the death of key witnesses, which impaired memory and evidence availability. The trial judge's directions were deemed inadequate in addressing these disadvantages, creating a real risk of a miscarriage of justice. While the Court noted that a specific direction that lies do not automatically prove guilt was not strictly necessary, the cumulative effect of the inadequate directions rendered the verdict unsafe. Consequently, the convictions were set aside, and a retrial was ordered.