Intoxication is relevant only to the subjective element of honest and reasonable mistaken belief under s 24 of the Criminal Code (Qld), not the objective element. A direction on intoxication need not be given where the evidence of alcohol consumption is scant and there is no evidence of indicia of intoxication. Similarly, a direction on an accused's limited English language ability need not be given where the evidence shows the accused understood the relevant conversation and had no difficulty with normal English conversation. The case also illustrates that latent duplicity arising from multiple acts of penetration charged as a single count of rape may be relevant to the assessment of whether a direction on mistake of fact was required, even where no duplicity ground is raised.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 4 later cases that cite this judgment.
2 of the 4 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.