R v David Lee Garrett Nos. SCCRM 95/619 and SCCRM 96/9 Judgment No. 5652 Number of Pages 13 Criminal Law Evidence Propensity Evidence

The Court of Criminal Appeal of South Australia heard an appeal by David Lee Garrett against his convictions and sentence for multiple sexual offences. The appellant and the victim, F, had a previous sexual relationship which had ended, but they remained friendly. On the morning in question, the appellant tricked F into being handcuffed and then detained and raped her. The appellant denied all charges, claiming that the sexual encounter was consensual and that he did not possess or use handcuffs. The prosecution presented evidence of keys and handcuffs found in the appellant's possession after the offence, as well as evidence from a third party who claimed that the appellant had confessed to using handcuffs for sexual purposes with F. The appellant argued that the evidence of the keys and handcuffs was inadmissible as propensity evidence and should have been excluded under the similar fact rule. The Court held that the evidence was relevant to the fact of possession of handcuffs in April and that it did not disclose any discreditable or criminal propensity or conduct on the part of the appellant. The evidence was not excluded under the similar fact rule because it did not relate to a discreditable propensity or disposition or, at the least, bad character. The Court also rejected complaints about the summing up and the sentence, holding that the trial judge had discharged his duty and that the sentence was appropriate given the seriousness of the offences and the appellant's history. The appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed.