R v Tancock (No 2)

In *R v Tancock (No 2)*, the Full Court of the Supreme Court of South Australia considered an appeal against a conviction for indecent assault. The appellant, Tancock, had been found guilty of indecently assaulting a young girl.

The central legal issue before the Full Court was whether the trial judge had erred in law by failing to direct the jury on the specific elements of the offence of indecent assault, particularly concerning the requirement for the assault to be "indecent" and the need for the prosecution to prove the accused's knowledge of the victim's lack of consent or recklessness as to that consent. The appeal also raised questions about the adequacy of the summing-up in relation to the issue of consent.

The Full Court held that the trial judge's directions to the jury were insufficient. Their Honours explained that for a conviction for indecent assault, the prosecution must prove that the act was indecent and that the accused either knew the complainant did not consent or was reckless as to whether she consented. The judge's failure to adequately explain these elements, particularly the subjective element of the accused's state of mind regarding consent, constituted a misdirection. The court found that the jury may have convicted the appellant without properly considering whether the prosecution had discharged its burden of proof on these essential aspects of the offence.

Consequently, the Full Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction, and ordered a new trial.