Sage an examiner appointed under s 46B of the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 v ZZ

In this case, the respondent was charged with six counts of contempt of the Australian Crime Commission (ACC) for allegedly giving evidence that he knew to be false in a material particular during hearings before an examiner appointed under the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002. The respondent pleaded not guilty to all charges. The court had to decide whether the respondent knowingly gave false evidence, which amounted to contempt of the Commission. The evidence included CCTV footage, SMS messages, and expert psychiatric testimony that the respondent was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder at the time of the airport encounter and the hearings.

The court found that the evidence showed the respondent was familiar with YAAY before the airport encounter and that his interaction with YAAY was sufficient to lay down a memory. The court accepted the experts' opinion that the respondent's demeanour and evidence did not suggest he was experiencing an episode of PTSD or anxiety that would have affected his memory. The court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the respondent knowingly gave false evidence about not recognising YAAY and others in photographs shown to him during the hearings. The court dismissed counts 1 and 5 for lack of evidence of false knowledge, but convicted the respondent on counts 2, 3, 6, and 7.

The court concluded that the respondent knowingly gave false evidence in a material particular, which amounted to contempt of the Commission. The court made orders for the respondent to continue to abide by certain bail conditions and to attend the court on a specified date.