The King v LJ

The case of The King v LJ involves the defendant, LJ, who was charged with multiple offences, including sexual offences against three complainants: CD, TD, and SJ. The Crown sought to introduce evidence of the defendant's sexual activities with the complainants and other uncharged acts of a similar nature to prove his propensity to commit these offences. The legal issues before the court included the admissibility of the proposed tendency evidence under the Evidence (National Uniform Legislation) Act (NT) and the relevance of the uncharged acts in relation to the charged offences. The court also had to consider whether the charges against the defendant were properly joined and whether the evidence was highly probative of the complainants’ credibility.

The court found that the proposed tendency evidence was highly relevant and probative in establishing the defendant's propensity to commit the alleged sexual offences. Under the ENULA, the evidence was presumed to have significant probative value due to the nature of the charges being child sexual offences. The court determined that the probative value of the evidence outweighed any potential prejudice to the defendant. Furthermore, the court found that the charges were properly joined as they formed part of a series of offences of the same or similar conduct. The court also dismissed the application to sever the indictment, as the potential prejudice could be addressed by a proper direction to the jury.

The court granted the Crown's application to adduce the proposed tendency evidence, finding that it was substantially relevant to the reliability of the complainants’ testimony and the credibility of the defendant. The court emphasised that in cases involving child sexual offences, the probative value of the evidence need not necessarily outweigh the distress caused to the complainants. The evidence was deemed to have significant probative value in relation to all charges, and the court was satisfied that the probative value outweighed any danger of unfair prejudice to the accused.

In conclusion, the court allowed the Crown to adduce the proposed tendency evidence, including evidence of the charged acts and uncharged acts, as it was found to have significant probative value in relation to the charges. The court dismissed the application to sever the indictment, as the potential prejudice could be addressed by a proper direction to the jury.