R v Johnson (No 2)

[2020] NSWDC 413

District Court

New South Wales

• Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation:

R v Johnson (No 2) [2020] NSWDC 413

Hearing dates:

09 June 2020 – 11 June 2020

Date of orders:

26 June 2020

Decision date:

26 June 2020

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Before:

Grant DCJ

Decision:

Accused found not guilty.

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW - Sexual intercourse without consent – trial by judge alone – multiple witnesses

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900

Criminal Procedure Act 1986

Evidence Act 1995

Cases Cited:

Fleming v The Queen (1998) 197 CLR 250

R v Johnson [2020] NSW DC 153

Xu v R [2019] NSWCCA 178

Category:

Principal judgment

Parties:

Regina (Crown)
Nathan Johnson (Accused)

Representation:

Counsel:
Ms Morgan (Crown)
Ms Cook (Accused)

Solicitors:
Ms Hanshaw (Crown)
Ms Giannopoulos (Accused)

File Number(s):

2019/00017894

Publication restriction:

Non publication order made of the name of the complainant and any other information which might directly or indirectly identify her

Judgment

1. HIS HONOUR: On Monday 9 June 2020 the accused was arraigned before the Griffith District Court and pleaded not guilty to the following count:

“On 31 March 2018 in Moama in the State of New South Wales did have sexual intercourse with BH without her consent and knowing that BH had not consented to the sexual intercourse”, contrary to s 61A of the Crimes Act 1900.

2. A judge alone election had been filed. The Crown did not consent. On 30 April I ordered that there be a judge alone trial: R v Johnson [2020] NSW DC 153.

General Directions

3. 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 that he is 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 heard and received final submissions from the Crown and Ms Cook of counsel. I will consider the submissions that have been made in the addresses 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.

4. I note 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 to 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. I am obliged to determine all relevant issues of fact according to the evidence that has been presented during the course of…