BW v R [2023] NSWCCA 146

BW v R [2023] NSWCCA 146

Leave to appeal was granted. By majority (Simpson AJA and Ierace J), the appeal was dismissed because it was open to the jury, on the evidence, to convict on Counts 1 and 2 despite acquittals on other counts, given explanations for the acquittals that did not require rejection of the complainant’s credibility in respect of the offences of which the applicant was convicted. Garling J (dissenting) would have allowed the appeal and entered acquittals, finding a reasonable doubt about the applicant’s guilt on Counts 1 and 2.

Parties
Applicant: BW; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal – Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed (majority).
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Conviction, Unreasonable Verdict, Inconsistent Verdict, Sexual Offences, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Appeal Against Conviction Unreasonable Verdict Inconsistent Verdict Sexual Offences Jury Directions

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BW

Applicant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal – Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the verdicts of guilty on Counts 1 and 2 were unreasonable or could not be supported, having regard to the evidence.
  2. 2 Whether the verdicts of guilty on Counts 1 and 2 were inconsistent with the verdicts of not guilty on Counts 3, 4, 5, and 6.

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was granted. By majority (Simpson AJA and Ierace J), the appeal was dismissed because it was open to the jury, on the evidence, to convict on Counts 1 and 2 despite acquittals on other counts, given explanations for the acquittals that did not require rejection of the complainant’s credibility in respect of the offences of which the applicant was convicted. Garling J (dissenting) would have allowed the appeal and entered acquittals, finding a reasonable doubt about the applicant’s guilt on Counts 1 and 2.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed (majority).

Orders

  • (1) Leave to appeal granted.
  • (2) Appeal dismissed.