R v RTW (No 2) No. Sccrm-00-128

In the case of R v RTW (No 2) [2000] SASC 252, the applicant, who was facing multiple charges of indecent assault, unlawful sexual intercourse, and rape against several boys, applied to the South Australian Court of Criminal Appeal for an order requiring a District Court Judge to reserve certain questions for the Full Court’s consideration. The applicant argued that the delay in reporting the allegations, the passage of time since the alleged offences, and other factors made it an abuse of process to proceed with the trial. The Court was required to decide whether the application should be reserved for consideration by the Full Court.

The primary legal issues were whether the application should be reserved for consideration by the Full Court, and if not, whether the District Court Judge was empowered to rule on the application concerning the first Information, which was not listed for trial before him. The Court noted that while the case had some unusual features, the issues raised were not of general importance and could be more appropriately addressed through sworn evidence rather than statements provided by the prosecution. Additionally, the submissions related to the repealed s 76A appeared to have little prospect of success. The Court also considered whether the District Court Judge had the authority to decide the application concerning the first Information, and found that it was undesirable to interrupt the trial to determine this point of principle.

The Court exercised its discretion and declined to require the Judge to reserve questions for its consideration. The application was dismissed. The reasoning was based on the general undesirability of delaying or interrupting criminal trials through appeals or applications, as well as the fact that the issues raised were not of general importance and could be better addressed through sworn evidence. Furthermore, the submissions related to the repealed s 76A were deemed unlikely to succeed, and the question of whether the District Court Judge was empowered to rule on the application concerning the first Information was found to be undesirable to determine at that stage of the proceedings.

The final orders were that the application was dismissed, and no questions were reserved for consideration by the Full Court.