R v S

The appellant in this case was convicted in the County Court of Victoria of multiple sexual offences against a girl under the age of 12. The appeal to the Court of Appeal focused on the trial judge's handling of the case, particularly the management of the jury and the admission of certain evidence. The appellant argued that the trial judge should have discharged the jury or declared a mistrial due to prejudicial evidence and alleged misdirections regarding a witness statement.

The court considered whether the evidence presented in support of count 7, which was subsequently dropped by the Crown, had prejudiced the jury to such an extent that a direction from the trial judge could not rectify the situation. The court also examined whether the trial judge should have pointed out specific inconsistencies between the witness statement and the evidence from the cross-examination to the jury. Additionally, the appellant argued that he was not provided with a clear indication of the particulars and occasions of the charges, which was essential given the confusing nature of the child complainant's statement.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge's handling of the case was flawed, leading to a miscarriage of justice. The prejudicial evidence and the failure to properly address the inconsistencies in the witness statement were significant errors. The court concluded that these errors could not be rectified by a direction to the jury, warranting a new trial on certain counts. The appeal was allowed, and the convictions on counts 1, 3, 4, 5, and 6 were set aside, with a direct retrial ordered on counts 1, 3 (indecent dealing only), 4, 5 (indecent dealing only), and 6.