Sexton v The Queen

The appellant, Sexton, was convicted by a jury of two counts of maintaining an unlawful sexual relationship with a child, relating to complainants PH and ND. He was acquitted of charges concerning complainant EK. The alleged offending occurred between 1989 and 1993, with allegations first reported to police in 2015. The appellant sought separate trials for the complainants' allegations, which was dismissed by the trial judge. An appeal was lodged on several grounds, including issues relating to the joinder of charges and the adequacy of the trial judge's directions to the jury.

The central legal issues before the appellate court concerned whether the trial judge erred in refusing the appellant's application for separate trials, and whether the summing up to the jury adequately addressed the defence's arguments regarding the lack of corroboration and the alleged lack of similarity between the complainants' accounts, which was crucial for the prosecution's improbability reasoning. The court also considered grounds relating to the admissibility of certain evidence, specifically an alleged erasure from the appellant's diary.

The court found that the trial judge's directions regarding improbability reasoning were adequate, noting that the jury would have been aware of the arguments presented by both the prosecution and the defence on the similarity of the complainants' evidence. The court was satisfied that the jury understood the relevance and weight of this evidence. The court also addressed the defence's contention that their case was not adequately put to the jury, concluding that the trial judge had articulated the relevant issues and the jury had been reminded of both sides of the argument.

Permission to appeal was granted on several grounds, and the court considered the referred question of permission to appeal on another ground. The court ultimately found no error in the trial judge's directions regarding the defence case and improbability reasoning.