DPP v Nicholls [2010] VSC 397 clarified that unavailable in relation to a witness means something more than just not in court. It was already apparent from the definition in the Dictionary of the Evidence Act 2008, but Nicholls confirmed it. What does available mean?Singh v The Queen [2011] VSCA 263 is an interlocutory, mid-trial …
Continue reading Singh v The Queen [2011] VSCA 263: when is a witness available?
We discussed Clarkson v The Queen [2011] VSCA 157 in this post last month. A bench of five justices decided that a lack of forcible coercion of the child victim of sexual offending might be a mitigating circumstance. This would only be in the rare case where it could be shown that the 'consent' (as …
Continue reading ADA v Bruce & Anor [2011] VSC 338: the De Simoni principle
We discussed Clarkson v The Queen [2011] VSCA 157 in this post last month. A bench of five justices decided that a lack of forcible coercion of the child victim of sexual offending might be a mitigating circumstance. This would only be in the rare case where it could be shown that the 'consent' (as …
Continue reading ADA v Bruce & Anor [2011] VSC 338: the De Simoni principle
In Clarkson v The Queen; EJA v The Queen [2011] VSCA 157 the Court of Appeal (comprised of five judges) considered the relevance of an unresisting victim to sentencing an adult offender for child sex offences.Maxwell ACJ, Nettle, Neave, Redlich and Harper JJA [at 3]:The absolute prohibition on sexual activity with a child is founded …
Continue reading ‘Consent’ is not mitigation to child sexual abuse
In Clarkson v The Queen; EJA v The Queen [2011] VSCA 157 the Court of Appeal (comprised of five judges) considered the relevance of an unresisting victim to sentencing an adult offender for child sex offences.Maxwell ACJ, Nettle, Neave, Redlich and Harper JJA [at 3]:The absolute prohibition on sexual activity with a child is founded …
Continue reading 'Consent' is not mitigation to child sexual abuse