R v Turner

[2022] QCA 101

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:

R v Turner [2022] QCA 101

PARTIES:

R
v
TURNER, Andrew Michael
(appellant)

FILE NO/S:

CA No 44 of 2021
DC No 342 of 2021

DIVISION:

Court of Appeal

PROCEEDING:

Appeal against Conviction

ORIGINATING COURT:

District Court at Brisbane – Date of Conviction: 26 February 2021 (Clare SC DCJ)

DELIVERED ON:

7 June 2022

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

8 February 2022

JUDGES:

Morrison and Bond JJA and Applegarth J

ORDER:

Appeal dismissed.

CATCHWORDS:

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – VERDICT UNREASONABLE OR INSUPPORTABLE HAVING REGARD TO EVIDENCE – APPEAL DISMISSED – where the appellant was convicted on five counts of sexual misconduct – whether conflicting evidence concerning the audio recordings was such that the jury must have doubt about the appellant’s guilt – whether there were irreconcilable difficulties with the complainant’s and the other witnesses’ evidence – whether the complainant lacked credibility – whether the evidence should have been rejected – whether the verdict was unreasonable or insupportable having regard to the evidence

CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – PARTICULAR GROUNDS OF APPEAL – MISDIRECTION AND NON-DIRECTION – whether in summing up the learned trial judge suggested that the evidence was the contrary of what it was – whether the learned trial judge misdirected the jury as to the witness’s evidence – whether it was open to the jury to accept the witness’s evidence – whether the jury was directed that the evidence of the witness was capable of corroborating the complainant’s account – whether the witness was reliable – whether the jury was directed that the witness’s evidence was capable of standing alone in proof of the specific counts – whether a Robinson direction should have been given – whether there was a miscarriage of justice

R v Reynolds [2015] QCA 111, cited
Robinson v The Queen (1999) 197 CLR 162; [1999] HCA 42, cited

COUNSEL:

S R Lewis for the appellant
D Nardone for the respondent

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the appellant
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent

1. MORRISON JA:  The appellant was convicted by a jury on five counts of sexual misconduct, occurring between 31 December 2017 and 29 June 2019.  The counts were:

   1.count 1 – maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with a child under 16 years;

   2.counts 2 – 5 – unlawful and indecently dealing with a child under 16, and under the appellant’s care.

2. The appellant challenges his convictions on four grounds namely:

   1.ground 1 – the verdict was unreasonable;

   2.ground 2 – the learned trial judge misdirected the jury with respect to the topic of what is evidence;

   3.ground 3 – misdirections were given with respect to the evidence of a preliminary complaint witness, PAL; and

   4.ground 4 – the learned trial judge erred in refusing to give it a Robinson direction.[1]

   [1]That referring to the bench book direction number 63, derived from Robinson v The Queen (1999) 197 CLR 162.

   Evidence at trial

3. The evidence…