R v Leach

In the case of R v Leach, the applicant, who was convicted of indecent assault and unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor, sought leave to appeal against his conviction. The appeal was based on two grounds: the alleged inappropriate remarks made by the trial judge during the summing-up, and the availability of fresh evidence that the applicant was not fit to plead or mentally competent at the time of the trial or the alleged offences. The Court of Criminal Appeal, consisting of Debelle, Williams, and Bleby JJ, dismissed the application for leave to appeal. The first ground of appeal concerned a statement made by the trial judge that a substantial penalty would be imposed if the applicant was found guilty. Despite acknowledging that this was an inappropriate remark, the court concluded that it did not lead to a miscarriage of justice, given the trial judge's repeated assertions that the jury could only convict if they were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt.

The second ground of appeal was based on the applicant's proposed fresh evidence from a psychiatrist, Dr Thompkins, who opined that the applicant suffered from schizophrenia or temporal lobe epilepsy, or both, before and during the alleged offences. The court held that the evidence did not meet the required standard for leave to appeal, as it did not demonstrate a significant possibility that the jury would have acquitted the applicant if the evidence had been presented at the trial. The court found that Dr Thompkins' evidence did not establish a probability that the applicant was unfit to stand trial or mentally incompetent to commit the offences, as required by sections 269H and 269C of the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935. Consequently, the Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed the application for leave to appeal.