A pre-trial ruling declining to exclude evidence is not an 'interlocutory judgment or order' under s 5F of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) unless its practical effect is to deny the Crown the opportunity to make a case against the accused. A complainant's practice of lying in a darkened room to encourage memory of historical sexual abuse does not, without more, constitute recovered memory or self-hypnosis attracting the strict admissibility safeguards in R v Tillott. The distinction turns on whether there has been a traumatic re-awakening of memory, triggering therapy administered by a third party, or self-hypnosis properly so called.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.