NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Peter James Wilson v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 217
HEARING DATE(S): 10 February 2006
JUDGMENT DATE: 2 August 2006
JUDGMENT OF: Handley JA at 1; Adams J at 2; Latham J at 3
DECISION: Appeal Dismissed
CATCHWORDS: Conviction appeal - inconsistent verdicts - Crown address raising motive to lie and lies told by appellant as consciousness of guilt - admission of videotaped interview with complainant as exhibit in trial - refreshing memory from document.
Evidence Act 1995 LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Evidence (Children) Act 1997
M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487 R v Mosegaard [2005] NSWCCA 361 R v Cox [1999] NSWCCA 62 R v Hughes [2000] NSWCCA 3 R v VHP NSWCCA (unreported) 17 June 1997 Edwards v R (1993) 178 CLR 193 R v Smith [2000] NSWCCA 468 R v Uhrig NSWCCA (unreported) 24 October 1996 CASES CITED: Dyers v The Queen (2002) 210 CLR 285 Zoneff v The Queen (2000) 200 CLR 234 R v Campbell [2005] NSWCCA 132 Bolus v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 182 R v AH (1997) 42 NSWLR 702 Pfennig v The Queen (1995) 182 CLR 461 Qualtieri v Regina [2006 NSWCCA 95 R v NZ (2005) 63 NSWLR 628 ; [2005] NSWCCA 278 R v DBG (2002) 133 A Crim R 227 ; [2002] NSWCCA 328 R v RTGS [2005] NSWCCA 293
PARTIES: Peter James Wilson - Applicant Regina - Respondent
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2005/2412
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate