Supreme Court backs use of victim behaviour evidence

Photo / File

The Supreme Court has backed the use of expert evidence on the behaviour of sexual abuse victims in two appeal decisions.

Both appeals related to the use of "counter-intuitive evidence", which is intended to correct wrong beliefs a jury might hold about the conduct of a complainant.

Psychologist Dr Suzanne Blackwell gave evidence at both trials on the counter-intuitive behaviour of some victims of sexual abuse, covering issues such as why they may delay report of abuse, deny it occurred, retract allegations, and continue to have contact with their abuser.

In one case, the appellant had sexually violated and assaulted his daughter on numerous occasions from the age of 11 to 15.

Under pressure from family, the girl retracted her complaint to police, and then withdrew her retraction.

An appeal against the conviction on the basis that the scope of Dr Blackwell's evidence was excessive was dismissed by the Court of Appeal.

In the second case, Abraham Eparaima Kohai was convicted of 14 counts of sexual offending against three children.

Kohai also appealed against the conviction, claiming Dr Blackwell's evidence was not admissible, and also lost.

The Supreme Court unanimously upheld the Court of Appeal's decisions to dismiss the appeals.

It found counter-intuitive evidence was "substantially helpful" because it corrected false assumptions about the conduct of victims of abuse.

But in future cases, it said it may be appropriate for this kind of evidence to be summarised and an agreed statement presented to the jury.

In Kohai's case, the court found minor aspects of Dr Blackwell's evidence went beyond what was strictly relevant, but overall the trial was not unfair.