The failure by the prosecution to tender evidence in its case in chief, instead introducing it during cross-examination of the accused, constitutes a miscarriage of justice under s 668E(1) but does not necessarily result in a substantial miscarriage of justice under s 668E(1A) where the evidence was admissible, the accused had notice of it, and the outcome would have been the same. A sentence of six years' imprisonment for each of three counts of incest involving a step-father and step-daughter aged 14-17 was upheld as within range, having regard to the breach of trust, the controlling relationship, the lack of remorse, and the appellant's attempt to blame the victim.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 7 later cases that cite this judgment.