Stinson v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 191

Stinson v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 191

The verdicts could be rationally reconciled because the acquittals and rejection of aggravation were explicable by evidentiary issues distinct from the complainant's credibility on the penile vaginal intercourse counts. On the whole of the evidence, including the surrounding events, the complainant's distress and complaints, the appellant's alcohol-affected conduct, his entry into the locked bathroom, the bruising, and the circumstances in which he left, it was open to the jury to reject the appellant's account and be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of guilt on counts 1, 3 and 4.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal From District Court Convictions
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'inconsistent Verdicts' 'unreasonable Verdicts' 'jury Verdicts' 'criminal Appeal Against Conviction']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure'] ['sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'inconsistent Verdicts' 'unreasonable Verdicts' 'jury Verdicts' 'criminal Appeal Against Conviction']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal From District Court Convictions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the guilty verdicts on counts 1, 3 and 4 were inconsistent with the acquittals on counts 2 and 5 and the rejection of the circumstance of aggravation on count 1.' 'Whether the guilty verdicts were unreasonable or could not be supported on the evidence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The verdicts could be rationally reconciled because the acquittals and rejection of aggravation were explicable by evidentiary issues distinct from the complainant's credibility on the penile vaginal intercourse counts. On the whole of the evidence, including the surrounding events, the complainant's distress and complaints, the appellant's alcohol-affected conduct, his entry into the locked bathroom, the bruising, and the circumstances in which he left, it was open to the jury to reject the appellant's account and be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of guilt on counts 1, 3 and 4.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal should be dismissed.']