Louise Botham

The appellant appealed his convictions on four grounds, including the admission of expert evidence on domestic violence, the jury instructions regarding that evidence and the complainant's prior statements, and the trial judge's refusal to grant a mistrial after the jury accidentally received a handwritten note on an exhibit.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no error in the admission of the expert evidence, the jury instructions, or the trial judge's discretionary decision to deny a mistrial.

The appellant appealed his sexual assault conviction, arguing the trial judge erred in relying on the complainant's uncorroborated evidence, failing to consider inconsistent independent evidence, and ignoring the absence of physical injuries.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that while the trial judge sought corroboration, it is not legally required in sexual assault cases.

The trial judge's approach benefited the appellant, and there was ample corroborative evidence on the essential elements of the offences.