Milky v The King

• 1. Criminal Law
  2. › Appeal
  3. › Conviction appeal
  4. › Sexual offences
  5. › Medical practitioner convicted of sexual offending against patients
  6. › Tendency evidence
  7. › Tendency notice
  8. › Whether trial judge erred by directing jury that uncharged misconduct evidence not included in tendency notice could be used for tendency reasoning
  9. › Whether error occasioned substantial miscarriage of justice
  10. › Evidence Act 2008 (Vic), ss 97, 101
• 1. Criminal Law
  2. › Appeal
  3. › Conviction appeal
  4. › Sexual offences
  5. › Failure of prosecution to call witness
  6. › Jones v Dunkel direction
  7. › Whether trial judge erred by refusing to give direction under s 43 of Jury Directions Act 2015
  8. › Prosecution duty to call material witnesses
  9. › Jury Directions Act 2015 (Vic), s 43
• 1. Evidence
  2. › Tendency evidence
  3. › Distinction between tendency evidence and context evidence
  4. › Admissibility requirements
  5. › Tendency notice requirements
  6. › Whether context evidence may be used for tendency reasoning
  7. › Evidence Act 2008 (Vic), ss 55, 56, 97, 101
• 1. Criminal Law
  2. › Practice and procedure
  3. › Prosecution duty of fairness
  4. › Duty to call all material witnesses
  5. › Consequences of failure to call available witnesses

Quick Take