The majority held that a complainant's passivity after saying 'no' is insufficient to raise the defence of mistake of fact (s 24 Criminal Code (Qld)) for the jury's consideration, and that the absence of evidence of reasonable grounds for a mistaken belief in consent at the time of penetration is fatal to the defence being left. The dissent provides a detailed framework for assessing whether circumstantial evidence from the prosecution case can raise s 24, emphasising that the trial judge must assess the evidence on the view most favourable to the accused and must not conflate the gatekeeping function with the jury's assessment of reasonableness. A lies direction warning the jury not to treat lies as evidence of guilt is sufficient without a full Edwards direction where the lies relate to the accused's competing version rather than consciousness of guilt of the specific offence charged.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 5 later cases that cite this judgment.