The case applies settled principles on the distinction between fresh and new evidence on appeal against conviction, confirming that new evidence (available at trial) will not ground an appeal unless it establishes innocence or raises such doubt that the appellant should not have been convicted. A trial judge's direction on sexual penetration that emphasises the penetration must have occurred outside the parameters of the appropriate procedure effectively accounts for the 'proper medical purposes' exception in s 319 of the Criminal Code (WA), even if the exception is not expressly mentioned.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.