BRC v R [2020] NSWCCA 176

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: BRC v R [2020] NSWCCA 176 Hearing dates: 28 February 2020 Date of orders: 27 July 2020 Decision date: 27 July 2020 Before: Simpson AJA at [1]; Johnson J at [83]; Hamill J at [93]. Decision: 1. Extend, to the extent necessary, the time in which to appeal against conviction; 2. Refuse leave under r 4 of the Criminal Appeal Rules to rely on the pleaded ground of appeal; 3. Dismiss the application for leave to appeal. Catchwords: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE — trial — directions to jury – tendency evidence – context evidence – suggested directions in Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book – where directions regarding tendency evidence omitted aspects of the suggested direction outlined in the Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book – role of Criminal Trial Courts Bench Book – "bad character" direction and direction that the jury must not punish the accused for other conduct attributed to him – no miscarriage of justice demonstrated Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61, 66A, 61O(2), 61M(2) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5(1)(a), (b), 5F, 6(1) Criminal Appeal Rules, r 4 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 97, 97A, 98, 99, 100, 101, 110 Evidence Amendment (Tendency and Coincidence) Act 2020 (NSW) Jury Directions Act 2015 (Vic), s 62 Cases Cited: AL v R [2017] NSWCCA 34; 266 A Crim R 1 Alford v Magee (1952) 85 CLR 437; [1952] HCA 3 BC v R [2015] NSWCCA 327; (2015) 257 A Crim R 340 BP v R [2010] NSWCCA 303 BRS v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 275; [1997] HCA 47 DAO v R (No 2) [2014] NSWCCA 126 El-Ali v R [2015] NSWCCA 300 Elomar v R [2014] NSWCCA 303; (2014) 316 ALR 206 Harriman v The Queen (1989) 167 CLR 590; [1989] HCA 50 HML v The Queen (2008) 235 CLR 334; [2008] HCA 16 Hoch v The Queen (1998) 165 CLR 292; [1998] HCA 50 Hughes v The Queen (2017) 263 CLR 338; [2017] HCA 20 IMM v The Queen (2016) 257 CLR 300; [2016] HCA 14 Ith v R [2012] NSWCCA 70 Jacara Pty Ltd v Perpetual Trustee WA Ltd (2000) 106 FCR 51; [2000] FCA 1886 Makin v Attorney General for New South Wales [1894] AC 57 Markby v The Queen (1978) 140 CLR 108; [1978] HCA 29 McPhillamy v The Queen [2018] HCA 52; (2018) 92 ALJR 1045 Perry v The Queen (1982) 150 CLR 580; [1982] HCA 75 Pfennig v The Queen (1995) 182 CLR 461; [1995] HCA 7 Qualtieri v R [2006] NSWCCA 95; (2006) 171 A Crim R 463 R v Ball [1911] AC 47 R v Beserick (1993) 30 NSWLR 510 R v BRC (District Court (NSW), 30 March 2017, unrep) R v Ellis (2003) 58 NSWLR 700; [2003] NSWCCA 319 R v Forbes [2005] NSWCCA 377; (2005) 160 A Crim R 1 R v Hong [2009] NSWCCA 242 Sokolowskyj v R [2014] NSWCCA 55; (2014) 239 A Crim R 528 Sumpton v R [2016] NSWCCA 162 Sutton v R (1984) 152 CLR 528; [1984] HCA 5 The Queen v Bauer (a pseudonym) v [2018] HCA 40; (2018) 92 ALJR 846 Wilson v The Queen (1970) 123 CLR 334; [1970] HCA 17 Category: Principal judgment Parties: BRC (Applicant) The Crown (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: J Stratton SC (Applicant) B Hatfield (Crown)