The case confirms that discrepancies and conflicts in the evidence of child complainants of sexual assault — including inconsistencies in complaint evidence, imprecision about timing, and conduct seemingly inconsistent with victimhood — are matters for the jury to resolve and do not necessarily render guilty verdicts unreasonable. Touching of a child's waist under clothing, where deliberate, persistent and intrusive, can constitute 'sexual touching' under s 66DB(a) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) where the jury infers the purpose was sexual gratification.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 3 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 3 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.