R v Duncan

This matter concerned an appeal by Mr Duncan against his conviction. The dispute centred on whether Mr Duncan was acting consciously, voluntarily, or intentionally at the time of the offending, given his defence of dissociation or sleepwalking. The appeal was heard by Sulan, Peek and Stanley JJ.

The legal issues before the court included whether the verdict was unreasonable or insupportable having regard to the evidence, whether fresh evidence should be admitted, and whether there had been misdirection or non-direction by the trial judge. Mr Duncan’s defence was that he had no memory of the events due to an episode of amnesia, potentially caused by alcohol and drug consumption, or a dissociative state or sleepwalking. Uncontradicted psychiatric evidence was presented from Professor Sandy McFarlane, who explained dissociation and its potential causes, including intoxication, psychosis, and dissociation itself. Professor McFarlane considered it possible that Mr Duncan was disassociating, noting confusion and illogical behaviour described by witnesses, and suggested that viewing a particular website may have triggered disturbing memories, potentially leading to dissociation.

The court considered the grounds of appeal, including those relating to the unreasonableness of the verdict and the admission of fresh evidence. The court ultimately granted permission to appeal on several grounds and allowed the appeal on grounds relating to the unreasonableness of the verdict and potentially fresh evidence. The verdicts of guilty were set aside, and a retrial was ordered.