R v Jandamarra (a pseudonym) - [2020] NSWDC 424

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Jandamarra (A pseudonym) [2020] NSWDC 424
Hearing dates: 18 May 2020 - 22 May 2020
Date of orders: 3 June 2020
Decision date: 03 June 2020
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Grant DCJ
Decision:
The accused is found not guilty on all counts.

Catchwords:
Criminal law – Judge alone trial – sexual intercourse - child complainant

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900
Criminal Procedure Act 1986

Cases Cited:
R v Johnson [2020] NSWDC 153
Fleming v The Queen [1998] 197 CLR 250

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Jandamarra – A pseudonym (Accused)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr Radojev (Accused)
Ms Morgan (Solicitor advocate DPP)
Solicitors:
Mr Baumgarten (Crown)
Mr Barron (Accused)

File Number(s): 2018/00258291
Publication restriction: Statutory non-publication order re identity of complainant.

Judgment

HIS HONOUR: On 18 May 2020 Jandamarra (the accused) appeared before the Griffith District Court sitting at Albury. The Court sat at Albury to facilitate the evidence of a child complainant who had travelled from Traralgon in Victoria to Albury.
A Judge Alone election had been filed. The Crown opposed a Judge Alone trial. On 30 April 2020, following my decision in R v Johnson [2020] NSWDC 153, I directed a Judge Alone trial.
The accused was arraigned and pleaded not guilty. He pleaded not guilty to the following counts:

Count 1: Between 1 July 2017 and 14 August 2018, in Deniliquin in the State of New South Wales did have sexual intercourse with JCK, who was at the time under the age of ten years, namely of the age of eight or nine years, contrary to s 66A(1) of the Crimes Act 1900.
And the Director of Public Prosecutions further charges, in the alternative to count 1,
Count 2: between 1 July 2017 and 14 August 2018, at Deniliquin in the State of New South Wales did assault JCK, a person then under the age of 16 years, namely eight or nine years old, and at the time of such assault did commit an act of indecency on the said JCK contrary to s 61M(2) of the Crimes Act.
Count 3: between 1 July 2017 and 14 August 2018 at Deniliquin in the State of New South Wales did assault JCK, a person then under the age of 16 years, namely eight or nine years old, and at the time of such assault did commit an act of indecency on the said JCK contrary to s 61M(2) of the Crimes Act.
Count 4: between 1 July 2017 and 14 August 2018 at Deniliquin in the State of New South Wales did assault JCK, a person then under the age of 16 years, namely eight or nine years old, and at the time of such assault did commit an act of indecency on the said JCK contrary to s 61M(2) of the Crimes Act.
Count 5: between 1 July 2017 and 14 August 2018 at Deniliquin in the State of New South Wales did assault JCK, a person…

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 Jandamarra (a pseudonym)

Details

AGLC: R v Jandamarra (a pseudonym) [2020] NSWDC 424
Case: [2020] NSWDC 424
Decision Date: 03 June 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Jandamarra involved an individual accused of engaging in sexual acts with a child. The matter was heard in the Magistrates Court of Western Australia. The dispute centred around the credibility of the child complainant and the lack of physical evidence to corroborate her claims.

The legal issues before the court included whether the child complainant was credible and whether the evidence presented was sufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The court had to assess the reliability of the child's testimony, considering her age and the circumstances under which the alleged offences occurred. Additionally, the absence of physical evidence or corroboration posed a significant challenge in establishing the defendant's guilt.

The court meticulously evaluated the testimony of the child complainant, considering her demeanour and the consistency of her statements. The absence of physical evidence or other corroborative testimony further complicated the assessment of the case. Ultimately, the court concluded that there were reasonable doubts as to the defendant's guilt. Consequently, the accused was found not guilty on all counts.

The court's decision resulted in the acquittal of the accused on all charges. The lack of corroborative evidence and reasonable doubts about the credibility of the complainant led to this outcome. The court's ruling underscores the importance of robust evidence in criminal trials, particularly in cases involving allegations of sexual offences against children.

Orders

Orders of the court

The accused is found not guilty on all counts.

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 Jandamarra (A pseudonym) [2020] NSWDC 424
Hearing dates:	18 May 2020 - 22 May 2020
Date of orders:	3 June 2020
Decision date:	03 June 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Grant DCJ
Decision:	The accused is found not guilty on all counts.
Catchwords:	Criminal law – Judge alone trial – sexual intercourse - child complainant
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Criminal Procedure Act 1986
Cases Cited:	R v Johnson [2020] NSWDC 153 Fleming v The Queen [1998] 197 CLR 250
Category:	Principal judgment
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Jandamarra – A pseudonym (Accused)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr Radojev (Accused) Ms Morgan (Solicitor advocate DPP) Solicitors: Mr Baumgarten (Crown) Mr Barron (Accused)
File Number(s):	2018/00258291
Publication restriction:	Statutory non-publication order re identity of complainant.