NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: ZHU v R [2013] NSWCCA 163 Hearing dates: 30 May 2013 Decision date: 09 July 2013 Before: Hoeben CJ at CL at [1] Fullerton J at [95] McCallum J at [103] Decision: Grounds of Appeal 1 and 2 dismissed. Leave to rely upon Grounds of Appeal 3 and 4 refused. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - conviction appeal - three counts of sexual intercourse without consent and two counts of sexual assault involving three separate victims - whether course of events at trial gave rise to a miscarriage of justice because of the failure to order separate trials - whether s97 Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) was correctly applied - whether tendency evidence gave rise to a miscarriage of justice - appellant a practitioner of traditional Chinese medicine - whether jury should have been directed as to "for proper medical purposes" with respect to offence contrary to s61H(1) Crimes Act 1900 - significance of jury question - whether evidence gave rise to need for such a direction - whether direction required even though appellant had not raised the issue "for proper medical purposes" - whether jury properly directed as to appellant's good character - appeal dismissed. Legislation Cited: Crimes Act, 1900 - s61I, s61L Criminal Appeal Act 1912 - s6(1) Evidence Act 1995 - s97 Cases Cited: Carney v R; Cambey v R [2011] NSWCCA 223 Dupas v The Queen [2012] VSCA 328 Gillard v R [2003] HCA 64; 219 CLR 1 Ith v R [2012] NSWCCA 70 Madden v R [2011] NSWCCA 254 at [28] - [29] Pemble v R [1971] HCA 20; 124 CLR 107 R v Forsti [2010] ACTSC 85 R v Shamouil [2006] NSWCCA 112; 66 NSWLR 228 R v XY [2013] NSWCCA 121 R v Zaidi (1991) 57 A Crim R 189 Weiss v The Queen [2005] HCA 81; 224 CLR 300 R v Demirok [1976] VR 244 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Watson Ben Zhi Zhu - Appellant Representation: Counsel: Mr M Boulten SC/Mr P Lowe - Appellant Ms M Cinque - Respondent Crown Solicitors: McKenzie Leamey - Appellant S Kavanagh, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions - Respondent Crown File Number(s): 2010/274546 Decision under appeal Date of Decision: 2011-11-24 00:00:00 Before: Hock DCJ File Number(s): 2010/274546
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