ABR (a pseudonym) v R [2020] NSWCCA 33

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: ABR (a pseudonym) v R [2020] NSWCCA 33 Hearing dates: 11 November 2019 Date of orders: 06 March 2020 Decision date: 06 March 2020 Before: Meagher JA at [1]; Bellew J at [155]; Lonergan J at [156] Decision: (1) Extend to 8 August 2019 the time for the applicant, ABR, to file his notice of appeal.

(2) Dismiss ABR's appeal against conviction of each of the six offences and specifically:

(a) Grant leave where necessary to rely on grounds 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 and dismiss each of those grounds.

(b) Refuse leave to rely on grounds 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17. Catchwords: CRIME – appeals – appeal against conviction – multiple grounds of appeal including unreasonable verdict, alleged incompetence of counsel, asserted miscarriages of justice, argued errors in directions and comments to the jury, argued error in admitting tendency evidence, argued error in finding complainant competent witness – appeal dismissed

EVIDENCE – tendency evidence – criminal proceedings – evidence relied on to prove tendency to have a sexual interest in pre teenage girls – whether significant probative value – where part of defence was that the allegedly intentional conduct was innocent or accidental – whether probative value substantially outweighed prejudicial effect – where prejudicial effect ameliorated by directions and omission of certain material from tender – no error in admission of tendency evidence Legislation Cited: Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 (NSW), s 15A Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61M, 61O Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), ss 5, 6 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 275B, 294B, 306U Evidence Act 1995 (NSW), ss 13, 26, 31, 97, 101, 144, 165, 165A, 191 Cases Cited: AL v R [2017] NSWCCA 34; (2017) 266 A Crim R 1 Ali v The Queen [2005] HCA 8; (2005) 79 ALJR 662 Alkhair v R [2016] NSWCCA 4; (2016) 255 A Crim R 419 BC v R [2015] NSWCCA 327; (2015) 257 A Crim R 340 Browne v Dunn (1893) 6 R 67 Dao v R (2011) 81 NSWLR 568; [2011] NSWCCA 63 DPP (NSW) v RDT [2018] NSWCCA 293 Galea v Galea (1990) 19 NSWLR 263 Gilbert v The Queen (2000) 205 CLR 414; [2000] HCA 15 Hughes v The Queen (2017) 263 CLR 388; [2017] HCA 20 IMM v The Queen (2016) 257 CLR 300; [2016] HCA 14 Kamali v R [2019] NSWCCA 186 Libke v The Queen (2007) 230 CLR 559; [2007] HCA 30 M v The Queen (1994) 181 CLR 487; [1994] HCA 63 McPhillamy v The Queen [2018] HCA 52; (2018) 92 ALJR 1045 Mickelberg v The Queen (1989) 167 CLR 259; [1989] HCA 35 Nudd v The Queen [2006] HCA 9; (2006) 80 ALJR 614; R v Abou-Chabake [2004] NSWCCA 356; (2004) 149 A Crim R 417 R v Bauer [2018] HCA 40; (2018) 92 ALJR 846 R v Birks (1990) 19 NSWLR 677 R v Dixon [2001] NSWCCA 39 R v Markuleski (2001) 52 NSWLR 82 R v Sukkar [2005] NSWCCA 54 R v Wilson (2005) 62 NSWLR 346; [2005] NSWCCA 20 Ratten v The Queen (1974) 131 CLR 510; [1974] HCA 35 RGM v R [2012] NSWCCA 89 Roos v R [2019] NSWCCA 67 SKA v The Queen (2011) 243 CLR 400; [2011] HCA 13 Sokolowskj v R [2014] NSWCCA 55; (2014) 239 A Crim R 528 The Queen v Baden-Clay (2016) 258 CLR 308; [2016] HCA 35 The Queen v GW (2016) 258 CLR 108; [2016] HCA 6 TKWJ v The Queen (2002) 212 CLR 124; [2002] HCA 46 Category: Principal judgment Parties: ABR (Applicant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: In person (Applicant) C Curtis (Respondent)