Taylor v R

Brett Taylor appealed against his convictions on two counts of unlawful sexual connection. The jury acquitted Taylor on a charge of stupefaction. The appeal was heard on three grounds: (a) whether the trial Judge ought to have given reliability directions about the way in which the jury should evaluate the complainant's evidence; (b) whether the Judge erred in failing to give an adequate warning to the jury not to act on prejudice based on the allegation that Taylor had engaged in homosexual conduct; and (c) whether additional medical evidence could have made a material difference to the jury's deliberations. The appeal was dismissed. The Court found that the trial Judge had adequately directed the jury on the need for caution in accepting the complainant's evidence, and that there was no need for a specific reliability warning. The Court found that the Judge's direction on prejudice and sympathy was insufficient in the circumstances of the case. However, the Court found that there was no real risk of unsafe verdicts on the sexual violation counts.