Under s 45(4) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), consent is a qualified defence requiring both consent and an additional feature (such as reasonable belief as to age); both elements are in issue unless conceded by the Crown. Evidence of discreditable conduct (such as drug use) does not constitute propensity evidence under s 398A(2) unless it has features likely to cause the jury to infer that a person responsible for such conduct is likely to have committed the offence charged. Where discreditable conduct forms part of the res gestae as inseparable features of a connected transaction, s 398A(2) has no application. There are no hard and fast rules about jury directions on prior inconsistent statements; what is appropriate depends on the extent to which the inconsistencies bear upon the chain of reasoning towards guilt.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 11 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 11 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.