Evidence of steps to avoid detection and warnings to secure silence are equivocal as to whether a child accused knew conduct was seriously wrong (as opposed to merely naughty), and are insufficient without more to rebut the doli incapax presumption. The quashing of convictions on doli incapax grounds does not materially diminish the probative value of the underlying evidence when used as tendency evidence for other counts, because the jury's satisfaction that the acts occurred is not affected by the failure to prove the additional element of knowledge of serious wrongfulness. In multiple complainant child sexual assault cases, the extreme youth of victims (approximately 5 years old), the mode of initial contact, and the absence of physical threat are sufficient linking features to satisfy the significant probative value threshold under s 97(1)(b).
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 17 later cases that cite this judgment.
4 of the 17 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.