R v John William Parbery [2003] NSWCCA 120

Reported Decision : 141 A Crim R 43

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : R v John William Parbery [2003] NSWCCA 120 HEARING DATE(S) : 02/05/03 JUDGMENT DATE : 2 May 2003

JUDGMENT OF : Ipp JA at 45; Buddin J at 1; Smart AJ at 46 DECISION : In respect of counts 3, 5, 6 and 7 in each case the conviction is set aside and judgment and verdict of acquittal entered.

CATCHWORDS : Uncorroborated and delayed allegations of sexual impropriety - verdicts unreasonable and inconsistent M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 CASES CITED : MFA v The Queen (2001) 193 ALR 184 R v Markuleski (2001) 52 NSWLR 82 PARTIES : Crown John William Parbery FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60025/2003 COUNSEL : RA Hulme SC (Crown) J Dailly SC (Appellant) SOLICITORS : SE O'Connor (Crown) James A Hall (Appellant)

LOWER COURT District Court JURISDICTION : LOWER COURT 01/11/1209 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT Shillington DCJ JUDICIAL OFFICER :

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 60025/03

IPP JA BUDDIN J SMART AJ

FRIDAY 2 MAY 2003 REGINA v JOHN WILLIAM PARBERY Judgment 1 BUDDIN J: The appellant stood trial in July 2002 upon an indictment which contained seven counts involving various allegations of sexual impropriety against a young male. There were four counts of aggravated indecent assault and three counts of aggravated sexual assault. The appellant was convicted of three counts of aggravated sexual assault and one count of aggravated indecent assault. He was acquitted of two counts of aggravated indecent assault and in respect of one further count of aggravated indecent assault, the jury was unable to agree. In respect of each of the aggravated sexual assault matters, the appellant was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of four years with a non-parole period of two years. Each of those terms was ordered to commence on 8 August 2002 and to expire on 7 August 2006 with the non-parole period to expire on 7 August 2004. A concurrent fixed term of 12 months was set in respect of the conviction for the offence of aggravated indecent assault. 2 The appellant relies upon the following grounds in support of his appeal against conviction: "(1) The jury, acting reasonably and in all of the circumstances must have entertained a sufficient doubt as to the guilt of the appellant.