R v Peter John Parkes

In the case of R v Parkes, the respondent, Peter John Parkes, was accused of trafficking in a controlled drug, specifically heroin, on 25 June 2008. The case was heard in a court of summary jurisdiction where the trial was conducted by a judge sitting alone. The central dispute in the case was whether the respondent had sold or gifted the heroin in question.

The legal issues the court had to address included whether the evidence presented supported the inference that the respondent had sold the heroin, and the admissibility and effect of prior inconsistent statements made by the respondent. The court also had to consider whether the statutory provision under the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) could be invoked to allow for an alternative charge of possession of heroin if an acquittal was to be entered.

The court ruled that the evidence did not support the inference that the respondent had sold the heroin beyond reasonable doubt, and hence found him not guilty of the trafficking charge. The court admitted the prior inconsistent statements to prove the truth of the facts asserted in the statement, despite the hearsay rule, due to the respondent's explanation for making the statements. The court also noted that the statutory provision was not applicable as the respondent was to be acquitted, and hence possession of heroin was no longer an indictable charge.

Peter John Parkes was found not guilty of the charge of trafficking in a controlled drug other than cannabis, namely heroin, on 25 June 2008.