Kuc v WA

(2021) 289 A Crim R 547; [2021] WASCA 101

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against conviction
3. › Unreasonable verdict
4. › Whether verdict unreasonable or unsupported by evidence
5. › Conflicting accounts of prosecution and defence witnesses
6. › Role of objective evidence including CCTV footage
7. › Whether jury entitled to reject defence evidence on combined force of evidence
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against conviction
3. › Misdirection
4. › Liberato direction
5. › Whether direction required in relation to defence witnesses other than the accused
6. › Whether general Liberato direction referring to 'any evidence' sufficient
7. › Criminal Code (WA), s 294(1)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against conviction
3. › Miscarriage of justice
4. › Prosecutor's closing address
5. › Whether prosecutor entitled to submit that defence witnesses lied to protect accused
6. › Whether evidentiary foundation required for submission
7. › Whether breach of rule in Browne v Dunn
8. › Duty of prosecutor to act fairly
1. Evidence
2. › Cross-examination
3. › Rule in Browne v Dunn
4. › Whether prosecutor required to put to defence witness specific basis for disbelief
5. › Whether failure to object at trial relevant to assessment of unfairness

Quick Take

A Liberato direction that refers to the accused's evidence 'or any evidence for that matter' is sufficient to cover defence witnesses without a specific direction naming each witness. A prosecutor may submit that a defence witness lied to protect the accused without establishing a specific motive, provided the submission is based on the combined force of the evidence. Fairness does not require the prosecutor to put to a defence witness the specific basis for disbelief where the general proposition that the witness is lying has already been put and denied.