Berntsen v R [2023] NSWCCA 296

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.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Carl Jason Berntsen

Applicant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction, Leave to Appeal Granted, Appeal Dismissed

  1. 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. 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