Saab (a pseudonym) v The King

[2025] VSCA 211

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Conviction appeal
4. › Jury directions
5. › Other misconduct evidence
6. › Failure to give complete direction under s 27(2)(a)
7. › Whether failure to direct jury not to use evidence for any other purpose gave rise to substantial miscarriage of justice
8. › Jury Directions Act 2015 (Vic), ss 12, 27, 29
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Conviction appeal
4. › Jury directions
5. › Tendency reasoning
6. › Whether prosecutor's closing address invited jury to engage in tendency reasoning
7. › Whether judge's charge adequately protected against risk of tendency reasoning
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Conviction appeal
4. › Prosecutor's address
5. › Onus of proof
6. › Whether prosecutor reversed onus of proof by pointing to accused's failure to produce evidence
1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal
3. › Conviction appeal
4. › Inevitability of conviction
5. › Whether conviction on charges supported by video evidence was inevitable
6. › Whether video evidence alone made conviction inevitable where sexual penetration not shown on video

Quick Take

A trial judge's direction that other misconduct evidence was led for a 'limited purpose' does not satisfy the requirement under s 27(2)(a) of the Jury Directions Act 2015 to direct the jury not to use the evidence for any other purpose; the direction must be express, not implied.

Case Details

Citation[2025] VSCA 211

CourtVSCA

JurisdictionVictoria

Unlock so much more with Barrister AI

The full text is available to signed-in members.

Relies on5

2024Parker v The KingVSCA 72
2012Baini v The QueenHCA 59
2012SKA v ReginaNSWCCA 205
2009JDK v R R v JDKNSWCCA 76
and 1 more after sign-in

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in