NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: KTR v R [2010] NSWCCA 271
HEARING DATE(S): 25 May 2010
JUDGMENT DATE: 3 December 2010
JUDGMENT OF: McClellan CJatCL at 1; Simpson J at 132; Fullerton J at 151
DECISION: Appeal dismissed
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - whether the trial judge erred in admitting evidence of the violent behaviour of the offender over a period of time and failed to give the jury adequate instructions regarding this evidence in sexual assault cases - whether there was a miscarriage of justice in relation to the Crown Prosecutor's address - where violence by offender may explain the acquiescence and failure to complain by victims of sexual assault - application of rule 4
LEGISLATION CITED: Evidence Act 1995
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
HML v R (2008) 235 CLR 334; [2008] HCA 16 Hoch v The Queen [1988] HCA 50; 165 CLR 292 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Leonard v R (2006) 164 A Crim R 374 R v DDR [1998] 3 VR 380; (1997) 99 A Crim R 327 CASES CITED : R v GAE (2000) 1 VR 198 R v JDK [2009] NSWCCA 76 R v Livermore (2006) 67 NSWLR 569 Smale v R (2007) NSWCCA 328 Tully v R (2006) 230 CLR 234 Wilson v The Queen (1970) 123 CLR 334
PARTIES: KTR (appellant) The Crown
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2008/6655
COUNSEL: S Buchen (appellant) N Noman (Crown)
SOLICITORS: Legal Aid Commission of NSW (appelant) Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 2008/6655
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