In Victoria, the prosecution may rely on the acts constituting the offence and the child's age alone to prove that a child under 14 knew the acts were seriously wrong (doli capax), without the need for additional extrinsic evidence. The English authorities requiring evidence beyond the acts themselves (C v DPP [1996] AC 1) should not be followed. The doli capax rule is better understood not as a rebuttable presumption but as a requirement that the prosecution prove, as part of the mental element, that the child knew the acts were seriously wrong.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 27 later cases that cite this judgment.
9 of the 27 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.