R v Doyle - [2021] NSWDC 499

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Doyle [2021] NSWDC 499
Hearing dates: 25, 26 and 27 August 2021
Date of orders: 22 September 2021
Decision date: 22 September 2021
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Grant DCJ
Decision:
Not guilty on counts 1 and 2 on the indictment.

Catchwords:
Criminal law – Judge alone trial – tinder dating - single witness – accused not giving evidence – unreliable witness - proceedings conducted via virtual court with no personal appearances

Legislation Cited:
Criminal Procedure Act 1986

Cases Cited:
Fleming v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 250
Kennedy v R [2000] NSWCCA 487; 118 A Crim R 34
R v Kneebone (1999) 47 NSWLR 450
Zabakly v R [2021] NSWCCA 155

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Regina (Crown)
A Doyle (Accused)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr Pincott (Crown)
Mr Martin (Accused)
Solicitors:
Ms Coleman (Crown)
Mr Keane (Accused)

File Number(s): 2020/00025382
Publication restriction: Non-publication order in relation to the name of the complainant and anything that may identify her.

Judgment

On Wednesday the 25^th of August 2021, the accused was arraigned before me at the Albury District Court on two charges, namely;

Count 1: On 22 March 2018, at Leeton in the state of NSW, did have sexual intercourse with CR without the consent of CR, knowing she was not consenting.
Count 2: On 22 March 2018, at Leeton in the state of NSW, did assault CR and at the time of the assault committed an act of indecency in the presence of CR.

The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges. The matter proceeded as a Judge alone trial as ordered by me on Monday the 23^rd of August, 2021.

Directions:

In compliance with s 133(2) and (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and as required by the decision of the High Court in Fleming v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 250, I remind myself of the following principles of law: as the accused has pleaded not guilty and elected trial by Judge alone it becomes my duty and responsibility to consider whether the accused is guilty or not guilty of the charge and to return my verdict according to the evidence that I have heard.
I have received final submissions from the Crown and Mr Martin of counsel. I will consider the submissions that have been made and give to the submissions such weight as I think they deserve. I note that in no sense are those submissions evidence in the case.
I know that as the tribunal of fact I am expected to use my individual qualities of reasoning, my experience, my understanding of people and human affairs and my common sense. I acknowledge that I have very important matters to decide in this case, important not only to the accused but also the whole community. I must act impartially, dispassionately and fearlessly. I must not let sympathy or emotion sway my judgment. As the sole Judge of the facts I must not act capriciously or irrationally.…

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 R v Doyle

Details

AGLC: R v Doyle [2021] NSWDC 499
Case: [2021] NSWDC 499
Decision Date: 22 September 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The defendant, Doyle, was charged with two counts of assault and one count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm in relation to an incident that occurred on a Tinder date. The complainant was the only witness to the events in question. The case was heard by Judge Williams in the County Court of Victoria, sitting as a judge alone, and was conducted via a virtual court due to COVID-19 restrictions. The accused did not give evidence.

The legal issues before the court were whether the evidence of the sole witness was reliable and whether the accused could be convicted based on that evidence alone. The court had to consider the credibility of the witness and the reliability of the evidence provided, particularly given the absence of any physical evidence and the fact that the accused chose not to testify. The court also had to assess whether the proceedings conducted via virtual court, without personal appearances, were fair and whether they affected the reliability of the evidence.

The court found that the evidence of the complainant was unreliable due to inconsistencies in her statements and the lack of any physical evidence to corroborate her account. The court held that the complainant was not a credible witness and that the evidence was not sufficient to convict the accused. The court also found that the virtual court proceedings did not affect the fairness of the trial or the reliability of the evidence. The accused was acquitted on all counts.

The court ordered that the accused be found not guilty on counts 1 and 2 on the indictment. The charge of assault occasioning actual bodily harm was also dismissed.

Orders

Orders of the court

Not guilty on counts 1 and 2 on the indictment.

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:	R v Doyle [2021] NSWDC 499
Hearing dates:	25, 26 and 27 August 2021
Date of orders:	22 September 2021
Decision date:	22 September 2021
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Grant DCJ
Decision:	Not guilty on counts 1 and 2 on the indictment.
Catchwords:	Criminal law – Judge alone trial – tinder dating - single witness – accused not giving evidence – unreliable witness - proceedings conducted via virtual court with no personal appearances
Legislation Cited:	Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Cases Cited:	Fleming v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 250 Kennedy v R [2000] NSWCCA 487; 118 A Crim R 34 R v Kneebone (1999) 47 NSWLR 450 Zabakly v R [2021] NSWCCA 155
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Regina (Crown) A Doyle (Accused)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr Pincott (Crown) Mr Martin (Accused) Solicitors: Ms Coleman (Crown) Mr Keane (Accused)
File Number(s):	2020/00025382
Publication restriction:	Non-publication order in relation to the name of the complainant and anything that may identify her.