Suppressed

In this case, the appellant, [Appellant], appeals against his conviction on eight counts of unlawfully and indecently dealing with a child under the age of 14 years, with two complainants. The trial judge directed the jury in respect of evidence of a change in behaviour of one complainant at a time proximate to the offending. The appellant submits that the trial judge erred in his direction to the jury regarding this evidence and that the trial judge was required to give a direction in accordance with the type of direction upheld in MCA v The State of Western Australia.

The legal issues before the court were whether the trial judge erred in directing the jury regarding the change in behaviour evidence and whether the trial judge was required to give a direction in accordance with the type of direction upheld in MCA v The State of Western Australia. The court considered the principles applicable to the admission of such evidence and the appropriate direction to be given to the jury. The court also considered the relevant authorities on the issue.

The court found that the trial judge did not err in directing the jury regarding the change in behaviour evidence. The court found that the trial judge gave a direction that was in accordance with the principles applicable to such evidence and that the direction was sufficient to ensure that the jury did not place undue or exclusive reliance on the evidence. The court also found that the trial judge was not required to give a direction in accordance with the type of direction upheld in MCA v The State of Western Australia. The court found that the direction given in that case was not applicable to the present case and that the direction given in this case was sufficient.

The appeal was dismissed. No orders for costs.