R v Taylor

In this case, the respondent, Taylor, was convicted of sexual offences against a child. The applicant, Taylor, appealed against both his conviction and sentence. The primary issue before the court was whether the judge erred in directing the jury that a significant number of telephone calls from Taylor to the complainant, within a limited timeframe, and periodic visits to the complainant when she was alone were capable of supporting the complainant's evidence of subsequent sexual molestation. Another issue was whether the corroborative evidence should have been subject to a propensity warning.

The court found that the judge did not err in directing the jury as the evidence presented, including the significant number of telephone calls and visits, supported the complainant's evidence of subsequent sexual molestation. The court also found that the corroborative evidence did not require a propensity warning, as it was relevant to the offence charged. The application against the conviction was dismissed. Regarding the sentence, the court found that the total effective sentence of five years and nine months was manifestly excessive. The judge erred in wholly cumulating the sentences, despite Taylor being sentenced as a "serious sexual offender". The sentences were disproportionate to the gravity of the offending. Consequently, Taylor was re-sentenced.