First respondent found guilty of four charges of sexual assault
Whether judge failed to give reasons for rejecting evidence of first respondent
Quick Take
1Where an accused's evidence on the critical issues of alleged offending is not based on actual memory and amounts in substance to a mere denial, a trial judge is not obliged to give separate reasons for rejecting that evidence once the judge has explained why the complainant's evidence was accepted beyond reasonable doubt; the rejection necessarily follows.
2Evidence given by an accused about surrounding circumstances (such as the medical procedures ordinarily performed) does not elevate a denial on the critical issues beyond a 'mere denial' where the procedures described do not explain or justify the alleged touching, and therefore need not be expressly rejected to sustain a finding of guilt.
3The standard of reasons required varies with context; where no right of appeal lies from a County Court rehearing, the obligation extends to identifying the grounds or basis of the decision in sufficient detail for a reviewing court to see the basis for the findings, but does not require detailed reasoning as to every piece of evidence where the grounds for the critical findings are otherwise apparent from the reasons.
