Dadley v R [2021] NSWCCA 267

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Dadley v R [2021] NSWCCA 267 Hearing dates: 15 September 2021 Date of orders: 09 November 2021 Decision date: 09 November 2021 Before: Bell P at [1]; Walton J at [132]; Bellew J at [133] Decision: 1. Leave to appeal is granted. 2. Appeal allowed. 3. The applicant's conviction is quashed and the sentence set aside. Catchwords: CRIME – Appeals – appeal against conviction – where applicant charged with two counts of sexual intercourse without consent and one count of indecent assault – where jury found the applicant not guilty of one count of sexual assault, but guilty of another count of sexual assault and indecent assault – where the events founding the three complaints were intertwined both temporally and contextually CRIME – Appeals – appeal against conviction – inconsistent verdicts – where the guilty verdicts on two of the counts were inconsistent with the applicant's acquittal on one count of sexual intercourse without consent – where the acquittal on the one count of sexual intercourse without consent was explicable only by doubts the jury must have held as to the complainant's credibility – where the events founding the three complaints were intertwined both temporally and contextually CRIME – Appeals – appeal against conviction – unreasonable verdicts – where verdicts were unreasonable and could not be supported having regard to the whole of the evidence – where the complainant's assessed state of intoxication and the implausibility in aspects of her account should have caused a doubt in the mind of the jury as to whether or not the applicant was guilty – where certain DNA evidence appeared to have been critical to the jury's returning of a guilty verdict against the applicant – where such DNA evidence was more consistent with a secondary transfer as a result of the complainant having picked up the applicant's DNA in relevantly innocuous circumstances Legislation Cited: Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) s 6 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) ss 130A(3), 306I Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) s 137 Cases Cited: Bussey v R [2020] NSWCCA 280 Director of Public Prosecutions v Paulino (2017) 54 VR 109; [2017] VSCA 38 DPP v Wise [2016] VSCA 173 Gage v R [2021] NSWCCA 222 Ganiji v R [2019] NSWCCA 208 Jafary v R [2018] NSWCCA 243 Jones v The Queen (1997) 191 CLR 439; [1997] HCA 56 Keen v R (2020) 102 NSWLR 178; [2020] NSWCCA 59 Kim v R [2020] NSWCCA 288 Long (a pseudonym) v R [2021] NSWCCA 212 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487; [1994] HCA 63 MacKenzie v The Queen (1996) 190 CLR 348; [1996] HCA 35 Martin v R [2020] NSWCCA 192 MFA v The Queen (2002) 213 CLR 606; [2002] HCA 53 ML v R [2015] NSWCCA 27 Nguyen v R [2021] NSWCCA 85 Pell v The Queen (2020) 268 CLR 123; [2020] HCA 12 R v Markuleski (2001) 52 NSWLR 82; [2001] NSWCCA 290 R v Stone (Court of Criminal Appeal (UK), 13 December 1954, unrep) R v TK (2009) 74 NSWLR 299; [2009] NSWCCA 151 Rogerson v R; McNamara v R [2021] NSWCCA 160 Roos v R [2019] NSWCCA 67 SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400; [2011] HCA 13 The Queen v Baden-Clay (2016) 258 CLR 308; [2016] HCA 35 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Andrew Thomas Dadley (Applicant) The Crown (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: