The proviso under s 30(4) of the Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA) was applied where inadmissible hearsay evidence from a complainant's visually recorded interview was wrongly admitted, but the evidence was given no prominence at trial and the appellant was proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt on the properly admitted evidence. Statements in a complainant's interview referring to conversations with another child about what the accused 'did with us' constitute hearsay where they may reasonably be understood as asserting that the other child was also sexually interfered with by the accused.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.