R v KDY

The appellant was convicted in the County Court of Victoria of indecently dealing with a child under the age of 16 years. The appellant appealed against his conviction to the Court of Appeal, arguing that the trial judge had failed to adequately direct the jury on the adequacy of circumstantial evidence, and that the jury question was inappropriate. The appeal was heard by the Court of Appeal, which was required to consider whether the trial judge had erred in the directions given to the jury concerning circumstantial evidence, and whether the jury question was appropriate.

The Court of Appeal held that the trial judge had given appropriate directions to the jury concerning circumstantial evidence, and that the jury question was appropriate. The Court found that the direction given by the trial judge was consistent with the direction identified in Liberato v The Queen, and that there was no material error in the instruction given. The Court found that the inference of guilt was the only rational inference that could be drawn from the evidence, and that the jury was not required to exclude rational inferences. The Court further found that any irregularity in the trial did not impinge on the credibility of the principal Crown witness, and that no innocent hypothesis was open. The Court of Appeal held that the verdict was not unreasonable, and that the appeal was dismissed.

The Court of Appeal applied the proviso to s 568(1) Crimes Act 1958, as set out in Weiss v The Queen, and held that any irregularity did not impinge on the credibility of the principal Crown witness, and that no innocent hypothesis was open. The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge had adequately directed the jury on the adequacy of circumstantial evidence, and that the jury question was appropriate. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, and affirmed the conviction of the appellant.