Regina v Bond [2000] NSWCCA 518

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : Regina v Bond [2000] NSWCCA 518 revised - 14/12/2000 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60614/99 HEARING DATE(S) : 17 August 2000 JUDGMENT DATE : 8 December 2000

PARTIES : Regina v Raymond Arnold Bond JUDGMENT OF : Stein JA at 1; Smart AJ at 2; Ireland AJ at 79

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 98/31/0110 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL English DCJ OFFICER :

COUNSEL : (A) W Terracini SC & G A Newton (R) L M B Lampratti SOLICITORS : (A) W H Parsons & Associates (R) S E O'Connor CATCHWORDS : Criminal Law - Further evidence bearing upon credibility of complainant and prosecution - reasonable possibility it could affect verdict - matter left to jury on incorrect bases. Lewis-Hamilton (1997) 92 A Crim R 532 CASES CITED: CPK (NSW CCA unrep., 21 June 1995) K (1991) 161 LSJS (SA CCA) DECISION : Appeal allowed; convictions and sentences quashed. New trial ordered.

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 60614/1999 STEIN JA SMART AJ IRELAND AJ - Friday 8 December 2000

REGINA v RAYMOND ARNOLD BOND JUDGMENT 1 STEIN JA: I agree with the conclusion of Smart AJ that there was a reasonable possibility that if the jury had been aware of the victim's compensation claim and the credibility issues concerning Mr Eric Whitfield, their verdict could have been different. I share the reasons which led his Honour to that conclusion. Accordingly, I agree with the orders proposed by Smart AJ, regrettable as that course is. 2 SMART AJ: Raymond Arnold Bond appeals against his conviction on eight counts of being a father, unlawfully and carnally knowing his daughter when above the age of 10 years and under the age of 17 years. These offences are covered by s 73 of the Crimes Act 1900 and carry a maximum penalty of penal servitude for 14 years. The offences allegedly took place between 1 January 1973 and 1 March 1979 and when the daughter was aged 11, 12, 14-15 and 15. The appellant also seeks leave to appeal against the severity of the sentences imposed upon him. On counts 4, 6, 7, 8 and 9 he was sentenced to a minimum term of 5 years 3 months penal servitude and an additional term of 1 year 9 months and on counts 2, 3 and 5 to a minimum term of 3 years 9 months penal servitude and an additional term of 1 year 3 months. All sentences were to commence on 20 August 1999. The appellant was acquitted of count 1 which alleged that between 1 January and 25 October 1971 he carnally knew his daughter, a girl then being under the age of 10 years, to wit, the age of 8 years. 3 The appellant denied that any of the acts of intercourse alleged took place. He challenged his convictions on numerous grounds, including erroneous and inadequate directions, omitting to give the jury necessary directions, inconsistent verdicts, unreasonable verdicts not sufficiently supported by the evidence and fresh or new evidence involving the Crown not providing material to the accused. Those conducting the prosecution were not aware of it.