Where a complainant's video-recorded police interview admitted under s 93A of the Evidence Act 1977 (Qld) provides detailed accounts but the complainant's sworn testimony at trial is significantly weaker with professed inability to remember key events, it remains open to the jury to accept the complainant's version as recounted in the interview, and the resulting verdict will not be set aside as unsafe and unsatisfactory. A letter from a third party going only to the complainant's credit cannot be tendered as fresh evidence on appeal where it would have been excluded at trial by the finality rule.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
7 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.