A trial judge's assumptions about the likely sexual behaviour of persons of particular ages do not arise as matters of common sense or common knowledge and cannot legitimately inform the assessment of an accused's version of events. Such assumptions constitute factual errors rather than errors of law, and do not attract the [name withheld] principle requiring retrial. An appellate court may nonetheless uphold a conviction where it independently assesses the evidence and reaches the same conclusion without reliance on the erroneous reasoning.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.