Court of Appeal (Qld)|2001-11-30|Before: McPherson JA, Ambrose and Cullinane JJSeparate reasons for judgment of, each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made
McPherson JA, Ambrose and Cullinane JJSeparate reasons for judgment of, each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made
Catchwords
CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AFTER INQUIRY AND CONVICTION
– APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE
– CONDUCT OF
LEGAL PRACTITIONERS – where appellant convicted of sexual offences against
Source
Original judgment source is linked above.
Catchwords
CRIMINAL LAW – APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL AFTER INQUIRY AND CONVICTION– APPEAL AND NEW TRIAL – MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE– CONDUCT OFLEGAL PRACTITIONERS – where appellant convicted of sexual offences againststepdaughter – where nofresh complaint – where no corroboration– whether Crown Prosecutor’s final address led to a miscarriage ofjustice– whether Crown Prosecutor exceeded bounds of proper comment andsubmissions – whether statements by Crown Prosecutorcapable of leadingjury to entertain bias against the appellantCRIMINAL LAW –JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – COURSE OF EVIDENCE, STATEMENTS ANDADDRESSES – ADDRESSES –FINAL ADDRESS OF COUNSEL FOR CROWN –where sexual offences against stepdaughter – whether Crown Prosecutorexceeded boundsof proper comment and submissions – whether statements byCrown Prosecutor capable of leading jury to entertain bias againstthe
appellantCRIMINAL LAW – EVIDENTIARY MATTERS RELATING TO WITNESSES
AND ACCUSED PERSONS – CHARACTER AND PREVIOUS CONVICTIONS –
where sexual offences against stepdaughter – where defence counsel and
Crown
Prosecutor made reference to appearance of complainant – where Crown
Prosecutor asked the jury to consider whether the complainant
was motivated by a
desire to cheapen herself “because of what happened to her” –
whether comments appropriate CRIMINAL LAW – EVIDENCE –
EVIDENTIARY MATTERS RELATING TO WITNESSES AND ACCUSED PERSONS – CHARACTER
AND PREVIOUS
CONVICTIONS – GENERALLY – where appellant gave evidence
–where the Crown Prosecutor commented on the appellant’s
demeanour
– where the Crown Prosecutor referred to the appellant as protesting too
much as supporting an inference that his
evidence was unreliable – whether
comments appropriate
CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
– SUMMING UP – where sexual offences against stepdaughter –
whether Crown Prosecutor made statements capable of leading jury to entertain
bias against the appellant – whether directions
of judge strong enough to
counter biasCriminal Code (Qld), s 668 ECriminal Law
Amendment Act 1945 (Qld), s 19Nathan House (1921) 16
Cr App R 49 consideredR v Buckley [1944] St R Qd 147
consideredR v Day [2000] QCA 313
(2000) 115 A Crim R 80 consideredR v Hay
& Lindsay [1968] Qd R 459 consideredR v M [1991] 2 Qd R 68
considered
Judgment (1 paragraphs)
[1]
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent