Under s 61HA(3)(c) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), the correct direction requires the jury to consider whether the Crown has negatived any reasonable possibility that the accused believed (even if wrongly) that the complainant was consenting, and then to test that belief by asking whether there were reasonable grounds for it. A direction that asks the jury to consider whether the complainant's actions 'caused a belief' in the accused's mind and whether 'such a belief was a reasonable one' is erroneous because it imposes a purely objective test and may invert the onus of proof. The question left open is the correct methodology for assessing an unreasonable verdict ground where the court has also found a misdirection on the same issue.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 7 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.