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
While we were away the accused in DPP v Sajanesh Easwaralingam & Anor [2010] VSC 437 (a successful prosecution appeal) took the decision of Pagone J to the Court of Appeal in Easwaralingam v DPP & Anor [2010] VSCA 353.We discussed the Supreme Court case here last year. The appeal involved argument about the meaning …
Continue reading Easwaralingam v DPP & Anor [2010] VSCA 353: the requirements of hearsay notices
While we were away the accused in DPP v Sajanesh Easwaralingam & Anor [2010] VSC 437 (a successful prosecution appeal) took the decision of Pagone J to the Court of Appeal in Easwaralingam v DPP & Anor [2010] VSCA 353.We discussed the Supreme Court case here last year. The appeal involved argument about the meaning …
Continue reading Easwaralingam v DPP & Anor [2010] VSCA 353: the requirements of hearsay notices
Have difficulty telling the difference between tendency and coincidence evidence?You're not alone. The last time I wrote a paper on tendency and coincidence evidence (when it was still known as similar fact and propensity) it took me so long that by the time I had finished it the law had changed again. With that experience …
Continue reading BP v R; R v BP [2010] NSWCCA 303: tendency or coincidence evidence?
The Court of Appeal resentenced an offender for sexual penetration of a child in WCB v The Queen [2010] VSCA 230. The Court's own summary of the case can be read here.The offender had been sentenced to a non-parole period of six years, which was reduced to four. The case would be unremarkable but for …