R v RNM

The appellant appealed against his conviction and sentence for child sexual offences, arguing there were errors in the trial judge's directions to the jury. The case was heard in the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal. The primary issues before the court were whether the trial judge provided adequate directions to the jury regarding the relationship evidence, the Murray direction in respect of certain counts, and whether the dates were of the essence for the offence charged in one count.

The court examined whether the directions given by the trial judge were adequate and correctly framed the issues for the jury. In relation to the relationship evidence, the court found that the trial judge’s direction did not inadvertently raise the accused’s tendency to commit the offences, and thus there was no real risk of the evidence being misused by the jury. The court also found that the Murray direction was sufficient in respect of all counts, including Counts 3, 4 and 5, as there was no real risk that the jury would misuse the evidence. Regarding the dates of the offence, the court concluded that the dates were not of the essence for Count 3 and, therefore, the omission to direct the jury on this point did not affect the safety of the conviction. The court found that the complainant's evidence was capable of supporting a verdict of guilty on Count 3.

The Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed the appeal against conviction and sentence. The appellant's conviction and sentence were upheld.