Cross-examination suggesting an accused has had time to fabricate an account by reference to having had the complainant's statements for a period of time is permissible, provided it does not invite the jury to infer guilt from the accused's failure to give an earlier account to police. A sentencing judge who makes private inquiries of a regulatory body and relies on information not disclosed to counsel commits a denial of procedural fairness, even where s 15 of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA) permits the court to inform itself in any way it thinks fit. However, such error will not result in the appeal being allowed if the appellate court is not of the opinion that a different sentence should have been imposed.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.