R v Michael Lunn

Michael Lunn was prosecuted on a number of counts of child sex offences, with some dating back to incidents occurring in the 1970s. The trial was heard by the County Court of Victoria, presided over by his Honour Judge Byrne, without a jury. The central dispute in the case was the admissibility and weight of historical evidence, including the complainant's testimony and additional tendency evidence, which aimed to establish a pattern of offending by the accused.

The primary legal issue for the court to address was whether the historical evidence was admissible under the provisions of the Evidence Act 2008 (Vic), and if so, how it should be weighed in determining the accused's guilt. The court had to consider the relevance and probative value of the historical evidence against the potential for unfair prejudice to the accused. The court also had to determine whether the historical evidence could be used to establish a propensity or tendency towards child sex offending by the accused.

In delivering his judgment, Judge Byrne found that the historical evidence was admissible and had significant probative value in establishing the accused's tendency towards child sex offending. The court considered the consistency of the complainant's account, the corroborating evidence, and the unlikelihood of coincidence in the pattern of offending. The judge concluded that the historical evidence, when considered in conjunction with the recent offences, provided a compelling narrative of the accused's offending behaviour. As a result, the court found the accused guilty on all counts. The detailed findings and reasoning of the court are set out in paragraphs [220] to [235] of the judgment.