Pethybridge v R [2020] NSWCCA 185

Pethybridge v R [2020] NSWCCA 185

Significant doubts arising from inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence, particularly concerning the complainant’s reliability and the contemporaneous communications, made it not open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt as to the applicant’s guilt on counts 2 and 3. The guilty verdicts were set aside as unreasonable.

Parties
Applicant: Jack Pethybridge; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Conviction / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; guilty verdicts quashed and verdicts of acquittal entered
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Conviction, Unreasonable Verdict, Consent in Sexual Offences, Inconsistent Verdicts

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 2 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jack Pethybridge

Applicant

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal Against Conviction / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment

  1. 1 Whether guilty verdicts on second and third counts are irreconcilable with acquittal on first count
  2. 2 Whether evidence was capable of supporting guilty verdicts
  3. 3 Whether verdicts of the jury were unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

Significant doubts arising from inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence, particularly concerning the complainant’s reliability and the contemporaneous communications, made it not open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt as to the applicant’s guilt on counts 2 and 3. The guilty verdicts were set aside as unreasonable.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; guilty verdicts quashed and verdicts of acquittal entered

Orders

  • Grant leave to appeal
  • Appeal allowed