Regina v Glossop [2001] NSWCCA 165

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : Regina v Glossop [2001] NSWCCA 165 revised - 11/05/2001 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60595/00 HEARING DATE(S) : 27 April 2001 JUDGMENT DATE : 4 May 2001

PARTIES : Regina David John Douglas Glossop JUDGMENT OF : Meagher JA at 1; Sully J at 2; Dowd J at 57

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 98/21/0396 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Nield DCJ OFFICER :

COUNSEL : P. Berman SC - Crown C. Waterstreet - Applicant SOLICITORS : S. E. O'Connor - Crown Murphy's Lawyers Inc. - Applicant

Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) LEGISLATION CITED : Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Rules 1952 BWM (1997) 91 A Crim R 260 Alexandroaia (1995) 81 A Crim R 286 Bozatsis and Spanakakis (1997) 97 A Crim R 296 Lissof 1999 NSW CCA 364 CASES CITED: Pera 2000 NSW CCA 204 Powch (1988) 14 NSWLR 136 Jago v District Court of NSW (1989) 168 CLR 23 The Queen v Glennon (1992) 173 CLR 592 Tillott (1995) 38 NSWLR 1 JMS (1998) VSCA 19 DECISION : Appeal dismissed

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

60595/00

MEAGHER JA SULLY J DOWD J

4 May 2001

REGINA v David John Douglas GLOSSOP

JUDGMENT

1 MEAGHER JA: I agree with Sully J IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

60595/00

MEAGHER JA SULLY J DOWD J

4 May 2001

REGINA v David John Douglas GLOSSOP

JUDGMENT

2 SULLY J: The appellant, Mr. Glossop, has been presented in the District Court for trial upon an indictment charging against him two serious sexual offences. The victim, and the complainant, is the appellant's natural son. The earlier offence was allegedly committed between 1 January 1975 and 31 August 1976. The later offence was allegedly committed between 1 September 1977 and 31 December 1977. The appellant has entered a plea of not guilty to each charge. 3 By a motion on notice dated 31 March 2000 the appellant sought, so far as is now relevant, the following relief: "1. That these proceedings be permanently stayed. 2. Further or in the alternative that the evidence of ……… (the complainant)……… be excluded from the Trial. …………………………………………………………." 4 This motion was heard by Nield DCJ over the four days from 3 to 6 April 2000. In a reserved judgment delivered on 25 July 2000 his Honour refused the application for a permanent stay; and ruled that he could not properly exclude the entirety of the complainant's proposed evidence at trial. The appellant thereupon applied for a certificate pursuant to section 5F of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW). The Crown did not oppose the application, and his Honour granted, accordingly, a certificate in the following form: "I hereby certify that my judgment (copy herewith) given on 25/7/2000 is a proper one for determination on appeal in view of: 1. each complainant's delay in complaining about the accused's alleged conduct; 2. the possibility that each complainant's memory is a false memory, whether or not a "recovered" memory, rather than a true memory; 3. my view that I do not have power to order that each complainant submit to a medical examination (psychiatric and/or psychological) arranged on behalf of the accused." 5 Before this Court the appellant did not press the issue stated in paragraph 3 of the certificate, and no more need be said about that issue.