WHS v The King

Criminal practice – Admissibility of evidence – Sexual offences against child – Where evidence said to be available that complainant displayed sexualised behaviour prior to alleged offending – Where application to call evidence and cross-examine complainant about prior sexual history refused – Where s 293(3) of Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) rendered inadmissible evidence that discloses or implies complainant had or may have had sexual experience or lack of sexual experience, or had or may have taken part or not taken part in sexual activity – Whether evidence admissible under exception to s 293(3) – Whether "disclosed or implied in the case for the prosecution" that complainant had or may have had sexual experience or lack of sexual experience or had or may have taken part or not taken part in sexual activity – Whether disclosure or implication from prosecution adducing evidence that complainant was nine years old and from not adducing evidence of complainant's alleged prior sexual experience – Whether Crown Prosecutor's final address unfair.

Words and phrases – "assumption or inference a juror might hold or draw", "complainant's age alone", "disclosed or implied in the case for the prosecution", "evidence adduced or the submissions made in the case for the prosecution", "expressly or implicitly relied on by the prosecution", "failure of the prosecution to adduce evidence", "had or may have had sexual experience", "miscarriage of justice", "sexual activity", "sexual experience", "unfair reasoning".

Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6(1).

Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 293.