R v WAA

The appeal before the court was from a conviction by the appellant, WAA, on one count of maintaining a sexual relationship with a child under 12 years and four counts of indecent treatment of a child under 12 years. The appellant was acquitted of two counts of indecent treatment and two counts of unlawful carnal knowledge of a child under 12 years. The complainant was the appellant’s stepsister. The appeal was against both the conviction and the sentence, with particular focus on the adequacy of the primary judge’s directions to the jury and the calculation of the sentence.

The legal issues before the court were whether the verdicts of guilty and not guilty on different counts were reconcilable based on the evidence, whether the primary judge's directions to the jury regarding the assessment of credibility and the separate consideration of evidence for each charge were adequate, and whether there was a miscarriage of justice due to the absence of a direction akin to Markuleski. Additionally, the court considered whether the sentence calculation miscarried and if the sentencing discretion should be exercised afresh.

The court found that while there were inconsistencies in the complainant's evidence, the differing verdicts were consistent with the evidence presented. The primary judge's directions to the jury were deemed adequate, and no miscarriage of justice was found due to the absence of a Markuleski direction. However, the court found that the primary judge miscalculated the duration of the sexual relationship, which affected the sentence. Consequently, the appeal against the conviction was dismissed, but the appeal against the sentence was allowed. The court ordered a new sentence of three years imprisonment for the first count and 18 months for each of the other four counts, to be served concurrently, with the period of pre-sentence custody to be deemed time served.

The court's final orders were that the appeal against the conviction was dismissed, the appeal against the sentence was allowed, and the appellant was to be sentenced to three years imprisonment for the first count and 18 months for each of the remaining counts, to be served concurrently. The pre-sentence custody period was to be deemed time served in relation to the new sentences.