Wildsmith v R [2012] NSWCCA 116

Wildsmith v R [2012] NSWCCA 116

The evidence, despite inconsistencies and the absence of objective confirmation of mace use, was capable of supporting the conclusion that the applicant travelled to the scene with Tatchell and the weapons, was present when weapons were distributed, and physically participated in the attack with the requisite intention. The jury had the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses and was properly directed on credibility and separate consideration of each accused. The different verdicts were rationally explicable by differences in evidence concerning the younger accused, including good character evidence, AC's ERISP, evidence concerning SS's role, and the possible significance of youth...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['murder Conviction Appeal' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'inconsistent Verdicts' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'witness Credibility' 'section 165 Warning']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'evidence'] ['murder Conviction Appeal' 'unreasonable Verdict' 'inconsistent Verdicts' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'witness Credibility' 'section 165 Warning']

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 / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether, having regard to the evidence, the jury's verdict of murder against the applicant was unreasonable or could not be supported." 'Whether the verdict of murder against the applicant was unsustainable in light of the verdicts of manslaughter returned for SS, AC and AA.']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence, despite inconsistencies and the absence of objective confirmation of mace use, was capable of supporting the conclusion that the applicant travelled to the scene with Tatchell and the weapons, was present when weapons were distributed, and physically participated in the attack with the requisite intention. The jury had the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses and was properly directed on credibility and separate consideration of each accused. The different verdicts were rationally explicable by differences in evidence concerning the younger accused, including good character evidence, AC's ERISP, evidence concerning SS's role, and the possible significance of youth...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal.' 'Dismiss the appeal.']