Evidence of uncharged sexual acts remains admissible as relationship evidence in Queensland sexual offence prosecutions, notwithstanding Gipp v R, but the distinction between relationship evidence and propensity evidence is acknowledged as increasingly artificial. A sentencing judge who takes into account uncharged sexual offences when sentencing commits an error warranting appellate intervention. In historical sexual offence cases, particulars need not specify precise dates but must identify the occasion by reference to objective external facts or events sufficient to enable the accused to defend the charge.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.