BQ v The King

Evidence – Criminal trial – Expert evidence – Opinion evidence – Credibility evidence – Admissibility – Where s 79(1) of Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) provides exception to opinion rule for evidence of opinion that is based wholly or substantially on specialised knowledge based on training, study or experience – Where s 108C of Evidence Act provides similar exception in case of credibility rule – Where appellant convicted of multiple child sexual offences against two nieces – Where respondent adduced evidence from expert witness concerning possible responses of victims of child sexual assault – Where expert gave opinion about circumstances of and responses to child sexual assault in "intra-familial" context – Where expert gave evidence that intra-familial child sexual assault often takes place within family home with other family members proximate – Whether expert evidence went beyond accepted area of expertise and was therefore inadmissible – Whether miscarriage of justice arose from failure to give general and particular directions to jury to limit use of expert evidence.

Words and phrases – "area of expertise", "behaviour of perpetrators", "child sexual assault", "credibility", "credibility rule", "direction", "evidence", "expert evidence", "expert witness", "illegitimate use", "intra-familial context", "opinion rule", "responses of victims of child sexual assault", "specialised knowledge", "wholly or substantially based".

Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) – ss 79, 108C.