Libke v The Queen

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIAGLEESON CJKIRBY, HAYNE, CALLINAN AND HEYDON JJJUSTIN PATRICK LIBKE   APPELLANTANDTHE QUEEN   RESPONDENTLibke v The Queen[2007] HCA 3020 June 2007B1/2007ORDERAppeal dismissed.On appeal from the Supreme Court of QueenslandRepresentationB G Devereaux SC with P E Smith for the appellant (instructed by Legal Aid Queensland)D L Meredith for the respondent (instructed by Director of Public Prosecutions (Qld))Notice:  This copy of the Court's Reasons for Judgment is subject to formal revision prior to publication in the Commonwealth Law Reports.CATCHWORDSLibke v The QueenCriminal law – Practice and procedure – Cross-examination – Appellant convicted at trial before jury of certain sexual offences against intellectually impaired person – Whether "miscarriage of justice" under s 668E(1) of Criminal Code (Q) by reason of manner in which prosecutor conducted cross-examination of appellant – Role of trial judge during the cross-examination – Application of the "proviso" in the circumstances – Requirements of Weiss v The Queen (2005) 224 CLR 300. Criminal law – Practice and procedure – Directions to jury – Whether trial judge gave adequate directions on issue of consent as it related to cognitive capacity and intellectual impairment – Whether trial judge gave adequate directions on defence provided by s 216(4) of Criminal Code (Q) that accused had belief on reasonable grounds that person was not intellectually impaired.Words and phrases – "cognitive capacity to give consent", "intellectually impaired person".Criminal Code (Q), ss 24, 216, 229F, 348(1), 348(2), 349(2)(a), 668E(1).GLEESON CJ.I have had the advantage of reading, in draft form, the reasons for judgment of Hayne ...