Evidence that an article is a resource for research, an historical artefact, or something worth preserving in an archive or library cannot rationally affect, either directly or indirectly, the issues to be decided by a jury in respect of a defence under s 58 of the Act.
Martin CJ
The statutory defence under s 58(a) of the Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Enforcement Act 1996 (WA) that an article has 'recognised scientific merit' requires the article itself to be the product of scientific study or analysis recognised as having merit by a respectable body of the relevant scientific community. Evidence that an article is merely a useful resource for scientific research, an historical artefact, or something worth preserving in an archive does not engage the defence. The word 'scientific' extends to social sciences including sociology and anthropology. Persons possessing material of research value that may constitute child pornography should consider the administrative exemption mechanism under s 105 rather than relying on the s 58(a) defence.
No headnote yet — we'll generate the full structured AI headnote for you.
Generate the headnoteFree trial · no card required
Legal principles extracted from this case
Cases considered by COLIN NUGENT (formerly HARRY HOLLAND) -v- THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Cases that have considered COLIN NUGENT (formerly HARRY HOLLAND) -v- THE STATE OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Judicial Consideration (Chronological)