Berntsen v R [2023] NSWCCA 296
The jury's verdicts were not unreasonable or inconsistent; there were logical and reasonable explanations for the acquittals on counts 6, 8 and 9 that did not undermine the credibility of the complainant's evidence on the remaining counts. It was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of guilt on these counts. The appeal against conviction must be dismissed.
- Parties
- Applicant: Carl Jason Berntsen; Respondent: Rex
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 29 November 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction, Leave to Appeal Granted, Appeal Dismissed
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Against Conviction, Unreasonable Verdicts, Inconsistent Verdicts, Child Sexual Assault
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Carl Jason Berntsen
Applicant
Rex
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction, Leave to Appeal Granted, Appeal Dismissed
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the jury's verdicts on counts 1–5 and 7 were unreasonable having regard to all the evidence and the not guilty verdicts on counts 6, 8 and 9
- 2 Whether the different verdicts are capable of logical explanation or show a reversal of the onus of proof
Ratio Decidendi
The jury's verdicts were not unreasonable or inconsistent; there were logical and reasonable explanations for the acquittals on counts 6, 8 and 9 that did not undermine the credibility of the complainant's evidence on the remaining counts. It was open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of guilt on these counts. The appeal against conviction must be dismissed.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
Orders
- Leave to appeal granted
- Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment