Events of childhood sexual molestation are inherently likely to remain fresh in the complainant's memory for the purposes of s 66(2A) of the Evidence Act 2008 (Vic), and the freshness requirement may be satisfied even where the first complaint is made years after the events, particularly where the complainant's reaction to later events demonstrates continued memory of the asserted facts. Inconsistencies in a complainant's chronology go to credit, not to the substance of the prosecution case, because dates, times and places are not elements of sexual offences required to be proved.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 15 later cases that cite this judgment.
6 of the 15 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.